A Qualitative Exploration into Voters' Ethical Perceptions of Political Advertising: Discourse, Disinformation, and Moral Boundaries

Political campaign advertising continues to be a controversial policy topic in advertising and marketing research. It is also a prime subject for investigating the ethical evaluations of consumers (or voters). The following study draws from postmodern communication theory and employs a qualitative research methodology in order to explore voters' intimate and subjective views about politics, candidates, and political advertising. The findings include emergent themes relating to significant media rituals in voters' lives, the cynical perspective of politics as a game, and the widespread disapproval and suspicion with which voters regard negative political advertising. Additionally, the a priori theme of political information as disinformation was proposed and expanded upon. Findings are discussed in light of a greater understanding of the appropriateness of the traditional versus the postmodern perspective of political communication, informants' construction of moral boundaries which help them determine right from wrong, acceptable vs. unacceptable political behaviours in this particular context.     

Are profits deserved?

N. Scott Arnold has argued forcefully that, for the most part, those who win profits (and suffer losses) in a market economy deserve them. According to Arnold, profit opportunities arise when there are malallocations of resources, which entrepreneurs initiate changes in production to correct. If they succeed, they simultaneously further the essential point of the market system — to meet the needs and wants of consumers — and they make profits; if they do not, then they stand to suffer losses. I argue that the structure of modern corporate enterprises tends to channel income into the hands of those whose entrepreneurial contribution is diminishingly small — namely stockholders — and away from those within the firm who genuinely participate in the entrepreneurial role.Grant A. Brown is a Lecturer in the Faculty of Management, University of Lethbridge, and a D.Phil. candidate in philosophy. His Critical Notice ofThe Libertarian Idea, by Jan Narveson, appeared in the September 1990 issue of theCanadian Journal of Philosophy. His Game Theory and the Virtues is forthcoming inReason Papers, and his Satisficing Rationality: In Praise of Folly is forthcoming in theJournal of Value Inquiry.     

The indefensibility of insider trading

The article, Inside Trading Revisited, has taken the stance that insider trading is neither unethical nor economically inefficient. Attacking my arguments to the contrary developed in an earlier article, The Ethics of Inside Trading (Journal of Business Ethics, 1989) this article constructs careful arguments and even appeals to Adam Smith to justify its conclusions. In my response to this article I shall clarify my position as well as that of Smith to support my counter-contention that insider trading is both unethical and inefficient. Patricia H. Werhane is the Henry J. Wirtenberger Professor of Business Ethics at Loyola University, Chicago. She is the author or editor of seven books including Ethical Issues in Business,edited with Tom Donaldson, in its third edition, Persons, Rights, and Corporations, Profits and Responsibility,and Philosophical Issues in Human Rights,edited with David Ozar and A. R. Gini. She is past president of the Society for Value Inquiry, founding member, past president and Executive Director of the Society of Business Ethics, and Chairperson of the Ethics Advisory Council of Arthur Andersen & Co. She serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Business Ethics,the Journal of Value-Based Management, and Public Affairs Quarterly,and is Editor-in-Chief of Business Ethics Quarterly.Her book, Adam Smith and his Legacy for Modern Capitalismis forthcoming with Oxford University Press.     

A note on government policy and the new ‘intrapreneurship’ in Bulgaria

Conclusion I have attempted in this paper to highlight the recent emergence and rapid growth of a particular type of intrapreneurship in the Bulgarian economy. This intrapreneurship involves the creation of new smaller establishments within existing large-scale industrial firms. These semi-autonomous auxiliary plants are exempt from part of the bureaucracy which constrains the larger addition, they have provided a higher rate of technological advance, a better supply of consumer goods, a greater utilization of labor resources, and a higher return to human capital.Only through the continued development of a small-firm sector can the Bulgarian economy meet the challenge currently posed by its western counterparts. Whether the next step from intrapreneurship to entrepreneurship is taken may hold the key for industrial development in Bulgaria.     

What is business in America?

This paper, presented at the Conference on Value Issues in Business at Millsaps College, is divided into three parts. The first sketches the logic of the evolution of U.S. business and suggests reasons for its remarkable success. The second assesses the power of U.S. business in modern society, both from an economic and political perspective. The third attempts to formulate the underlying philosophy of U.S. business using ideals such as the work ethic, entrepreneurism, democracy, and equality. Some of these ideals, the paper suggests, are irreconcilable. Thomas J. Donaldson is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Loyola University of Chicago. His publications in the area of business ethics include numerous articles and two books, Ethical Issues in Business co-edited with Patricia Werhane, and Corporations and Morality.     

Learning,market selection and the evolution of industrial structures

Industrial economics is a rich source of puzzles for economic theory. One of them — certainly the most discussed — regards the co-existence of firms (and plants) of different sizes, displaying rather invariant skewed distributions. Other puzzles, however, concern the sectoral specificities in industrial structures, the persistence of asymmetric corporate performances and the dynamics of entry and exit. The paper reports some preliminary results on evolutionary modeling of the links between the microeconomics of innovation, the patterns of industrial change and some observable invariances in industrial structures.First, the paper reviews a few of these empirical regularities in structures and in the patterns of change. Second, the paper discusses the achievements and limits of interpretations of the evidence based on equilibrium theories. Finally, it presents a model where these regularities are explained as emergent properties deriving from non equilibrium interactions among technologically heterogeneous firms. Moreover, simulation exercises show that also the intersectoral variety in the observed industrial structures and dynamics can be interpreted on the grounds of underlying specificities in the processes of technological learning — which is called technological regimes — and of the processes of market interactions — i.e. market regimes.This research has undertaken within an on going project sponsored by the Italian Research Council (CNR, Progetto strategico,Cambiamento tecnologico e sviluppo economico). Support by the Consortium on Competitiveness and Cooperation Centre for Research in Management, University of California at Berkeley is also gratefully acknowledged.     

Equal pay for equal work in the third world

If the principle of equal pay for work of equal value is valid, then the practice of paying workers in third-world countries at a lower rate than workers doing the same jobs in industrialized nations is unjust. Recently Henry Shue argued that the principle is not valid. In this paper I criticize Shue's arguments and offer additional arguments in support of his conclusion. Hugh Lehman is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Guelph. His most important publications are Introduction to the Philosophy of Mathematics, Basil Blackwell, 1979, Mathematical Proofs, Gaps and Postulationism, The Monist 67, and Intuitionism and Platonism on Infinite Totalities, Idealistic Studies XIII. He also edited a special issue of Animal Regulation Studies 2 that contained papers from the conference: Ethical Issues Concerning the Use of Animals in Agriculture and Scientific Research.     

Women,unions, and social policy

We contend in this paper that the trade union role in social policy is expanding due to the debate on women's issues. The Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec is seen as a forerunner of this trend, with its policy positions on questions previously seen as personal. The method of promotion of these interests is also new, with caucusing and networking. The significance of these changes goes beyond unionized women workers and affects all women. Dr. Margaret Beattie is Professor adjoint at the Département de Service Social, Université de Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. Her most important publication is: Women and Factional Politics in a Teacher's Union, Atlantis: A Women's Studies Journal (Fall 1982).     

Norman Bowie and Richard Rorty on multinationals: Does business ethics need ‘metaphysical comfort?’

Norman Bowie wrote an article on the moral obligations of multinational corporations in 1987. This paper is a response to Bowie, but more importantly, it is designed to articulate the force and substance of the pragmatist philosophy developed by Richard Rorty. In his article, Bowie suggested that moral universalism (which he endorses) is the only credible method of doing business ethics across cultures and that cultural relativism and ethnocentrism are not. Bowie, in a manner surprisingly common among contemporary philosophers, lumps Rorty into a bad guy category without careful analysis of his philosophy and ascribes to him views which clearly do not fit. I attempt to provide both a more careful articulation of Rorty's views, and to use his pragmatism to illustrate an approach to business ethics which is more fruitful than Bowie's. This brand of philosophy follows the Enlightenment spirit of toleration and attempts to set aside questions of Truth, whether religious or philosophical, and have ethics centered around what James called that which is good in the way of belief. Rather than looking for metaphysical foundations or some type of external justification, ethicists perform their craft from within the cultural traditions, narratives and practices of their society.Andrew C. Wicks, M.A. in Religious Ethics. Currently a fourth year Doctoral Candidate in the Religious Studies Department at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.     

Towards an Integrative Model of Small Firm Internationalisation

Firm internationalisation has long been regarded as an incremental process, wherein firms gravitate towards psychologically close markets and increase commitment to international markets in a gradual, step-wise, manner through a series of evolutionary stages. However, much of the recent literature provides clear evidence of rapid and dedicated internationalisation by born global firms. Typically, these are smaller entrepreneurial firms that internationalise from inception, or start to shortly thereafter. Their main source of competitive advantage is often related to a more sophisticated knowledge base. In addition, the authors have found evidence of firms supporting this born global pattern of behaviour but also evidence of firms that suddenly internationalise after a long period of focusing on the domestic market. These born-again globals appear to be influenced by critical events that provide them with additional human or financial resources, such as changes in ownership/management, being taken over by another company with international networks, or themselves acquiring such a firm. Based upon the extant literature and our own research, we propose an integrative model that recognises the existence of different internationalisation pathways. We then explore differences in behaviour due to the firm's internationalisation trajectory and discuss the strategic and public policy implications.     

Is capitalism still viable?

This essay is an attempt to clarify the meaning of capitalism and to argue that this form of economic pattern will survive in the U.S. in the twentieth century. Capitalism should not be viewed as an abstraction which implies a religion, an ideology, a form of government, or a moral philosophy, but rather the private ownership of capital. Marx was wrong when he predicted the speedy decay of the capitalistic system in the West and when he claimed that a competitive system will lead to servitude and poverty for the masses; on the contrary, the American economic system is a grand success. Part of this success resulted from natural resources; part from America's being one of the largest free-trade areas; and part from the economic system, so-called capitalism, by which we have governed ourselves. The outcome is a greater measure of freedom, prosperity, leisure, and industrial sophistication. These achievements are hardly paralleled by any of the advanced countries of the world. Russell Kirk is a Distinguished Scholar of The Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. He is the author of twenty-three books and of several hundred essays. His books include The Conservative Mind; The Roots of American Order; and, recently, Decadence and Renewal in the Higher Learning.This article was originally published in The Hillsdale Review. Copyright © 1982 by Hillsdale Review Inc.     

What is business ethics? A reply to peter drucker

In his What is Business Ethics? Peter Drucker accuses business ethics of singling out business unfairly for special ethical treatment, of subordinating ethical to political concerns, and of being, not ethics at all, but ethical chic. We contend that Drucker's denunciation of business ethics rests upon a fundamental misunderstanding of the field. This article is a response to his charges and an effort to clarify the nature, scope and purpose of business ethics.     

Learning to solve the right problems: The case of nuclear power in America

Three general types of problems entail different strategies. Continuing to seek solutions to tame problems when we face messes, let alone wicked problems, is potentially catastrophic hence fundamentally irresponsible. In our turbulent times, it is therefore becoming a strategic necessity to learn how to solve the right problems.

But then, you may agree that it becomes morally objectionable for the planner to treat a wicked problem as though it were a tame one, or to tame a wicked problem prematurely, or to refuse to recognize the inherent wickedness of social problems. Rittel and Webber (1973).

Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at Oregon State University. His primary research interests are in the areas of moral philosophy and modern technology. His most important publications are Confronting Chaos and Common Knowledge of the Second Kind,Journal of Business Ethics (1989).     

Limitations of ethical reasoning as an action (praxis) strategy

For both philosophers and managers, reasoning with ourselves and others can be used both as (1) a way of knowing what is ethical and (2) a way of acting to help ourselves, others and organizations behave ethically. However, for many of us, knowing is frequently not the same as acting. Four areas are addressed: (1) thirteen limitations of ethical reasoning as an action strategy; (2) how a better understanding of these limitations can strengthen ethical reasoning as an action strategy; (3) how an understanding of these limitations can serve as a conceptual foundation for exploring other ethical action strategies; and, (4) implications for experiential learning and teaching. Richard P. Nielsen is a Management Professor in the Department of Organizational Studies, School of Management, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02167. Related articles of his include Toward an Action Philosophy for Managers Based on Arendt and Tillich, Journal of Business Ethics, May 1984, What Can Managers Do about Unethical Management, Journal of Business Ethics, May 1987, and Cooperative Strategy, Strategic Management Journal 9, 1988.     

Ethics as an integrating force in management

Ethics will not become part of the management decision-making process until it ceases to be viewed as an add-on; first you decide, then you assess the decision ethically. This essay focuses on one ethical concept, the good or the valuable, and shows how to incorporate it in an ethically and economically effective decision process. We focus on this concept because it uncovers a key fault in strategic thinking and generates questions central to any complex decision.The concept of the valuable is used to distinguish goals and purposes. A goal is a more or less specific target toward which one aims. A purpose is a way of being or functioning viewed as valuable in itself.Purposes make values operational. We look at values through a set of questions derived from the concept of the valuable. One question probes the range of individuals relevant to a decision. Participatory and dialectical decision approaches are critiqued. A second question probes the standards of rationality implicit in management decisions.We conclude by responding to two objections. The first is that justice in decision-making is insufficiently considered. The second is that there is little reason to think that the proposals made here would work if implemented. Mark Pastin is Director of the Center for Private and Public Sector Ethics and Professor of Philosophy, Business, and Public Affairs at Arizona State University. He was formerly Associate Professor of Philosophy, Indiana University, and had visiting appointments at Wayne State University, the University of Michigan, Harvard University, and the University of Maryland. He has been a National Endowment for the Humanities Fellow and Research Fellow of the Center for Metropolitan Research of John Hopkins University. His most important publications are: Strategic Planning for Science, The Research System in the 1980s, ed. by John Logsdon (Franklin Institute Press, 1982), Ethics and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Business Horizons (December 1980), The Multi-Perspectival Theory of Knowlegde, Midwest Studies in Philosophy: Volume V (University of Minnesota Press, 1980), and Meaning and Perception, Journal of Philosophy (October 1976).This began as a joint project with H. J. Zoffer of the University of Pittsburgh. We both were promoting the idea of integrating ethics in management decision-making, but were embarrassed that we had little to say about how to proceed. So we picked the ethical concept of the good and set to work. This final product is my responsibility, but it certainly profited from Zoffer's efforts. This paper was presented at the 16th Conference on Value Inquiry, entitled: Ethics and the Market Place: An Exercise in Bridge-Building or On the Slopes of the Interface.     

Confronting chaos

While it is common to observe that our society and world are becoming increasingly complex and fast paced, most of our theories provide no bases upon which to develop appropriate strategies. The need for developing holistic strategies is becoming urgent in two related areas: major interactive technologies and morality. Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at Oregon State University. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Antioch College (1965) and his M.B.A. in Finance (1975) and Ph.D. in Business, Government and Society (1980) from the University of Washington. His primary research interests are in the areas of moral philosophy and General Systems Theory. His most important publications are The Three Faces of Thinking, Journal of Higher Education (1986) and Prisoner's Paradoxes, Journal of Business Ethics (1988).     

Dialogic leadership as ethics action (praxis) method

Dialogic leadership as ethics method respects, values, and works toward organizational objectives. However, in those situations where there may be conflicts and/or contradictions between what is ethical and what is in the material interest of individuals and/or the organization, the dialogic leader initiates discussion with others (peers, subordinates, superiors) about what is ethical with at least something of a prior ethics truth intention and not singularly a value neutral, constrained optimization of organizational objectives. Cases are considered where dialogic leadership: (1) helped build ethical organizational culture; (2) was effective; and, (3) as a by-product, produced integrative win-win results. Philosophical foundations for the method as well as differences between dialogic leadership and Theory X forcing leadership, Theory Y win-win integrative leadership, industrial democracy, participative management, action inquiry, and double-loop learning action science are explored. Limitations of the method are also explored.We must be still and still moving Into another intensity For a further union, a deeper communion(T. S. Eliot, 1944, p. 27) Richard P. Nielsen is a professor in the Department of Organizational Studies, School of Management, Boston College, 214 Fulton Hall, Chestnut Hill, MA 02167, (617)552-8858. Related articles of his include: Negotiating As An Ethics Action (Praxis) Strategy, Journal of Business Ethics 8, 1989; Changing Unethical Organizational Behavior, Academy of Management Executive 3, 2, 1989; Limitations of Ethical Reasoning As An Action (Praxis) Method, Journal of Business Ethics 7, 1988; Cooperative Strategy, Strategic Management Journal 9, 1988; and, Arendt's Action Philosophy and the Manager As Eichmann, Richard III, Faust or Institution Citizen, California Management Review 26, 3, Spring, 1984.     

Saturday Review's annual advertising awards

Saturday Review's long, commendable effort to identify corporations willing to promote the general good through their advertising was damaged in 1977 because of procedural changes in the awards. Prior to 1977 the named judges made the important distinction between public-service (non-image) and public-relations (corporate image) advertising. But in 1977 the judges were not named and the public service/public relations distinction was eliminated, replaced by the single category of public spirited ads. Most of these ads, however, were not public spirited, but were public relations ads. But in 1978 this deception was ended by the empaneling of a new kind of jury, one drawn from the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. James Richard Bennett is Professor of English at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. He is the editor of Style, a Journal of Stylistics. He won the Fulbright Teaching Award in Yugoslavia in 1968–69. His most important publication is: Prose Style: A Historical Approach Through Studies, 1971.I wish to thank Professor Leonard White of the Department of Economics at the University of Arkansas for his advice concerning several of the ads discussed herein.     

Mergers,takeovers, and a property ethic

The recent takeover and merger trend cries out for ethical evaluation. This essay proposes a model for evaluating them in terms of their impact on a firm's immediate stakeholders: investors, owners, management and employees. Since mergers and takeovers are Transfers of Ownership of Firms (TOFs) they entail a property ethic of ownership, control, securing stakeholder interests, and defining which stakeholders should exercise these rights. I use the model to evaluate two fictional cases, a friendly merger and a hostile takeover. The results show that neither TOF serves all interests equitably. Since the control structure of the private firm is legitimized by its interest structure, I reason that both should be reformed. Both rest on a broader economic rationale; but it is controverted. Accordingly, the economic and ethical evaluation of TOFs, I conclude, both entail the democratic reform of the control structure of the firm.A corporation represents far more than its current stock price; it embodies obligations to employees, customers, suppliers and communities.Robert S. Saul, Peers Merchant BankVincent di Norcia is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Sudbury. He is the author of Ethics in Management and Beyond the Red Tory.     

Business regulation,business ethics and the professional employee

The differences in business reactions to legal regulation, and the nature of business moralities, are examined through the eyes of an expert group — in-house lawyers. The research indicates that lawyers inevitably provide a degree of control through their technical expertise, but that they also identify strongly with their companies and emphasise shared ethics rather than ethical differences between lawyers and their employers. This can partly be explained by their integration with the company but also rests on the problematic nature of law and regulatory controls in relation to organisations within the community. In-house lawyers therefore reject a policing role in favour of a counselling role. Since they perceive themselves as part of a shared culture of ethics, they also avoid a leadership role. However, the article suggests that the nature of legal judgment should assist lawyers towards such a role, while recognising that organisational statesmanship must be constrained by organisational culture and the wider community culture of ethical standards. Dr Karl J. Mackie is Director of the Centre for Legal Studies in the University of Nottingham, where he lectures in employment law and in management skills development. Lawyers in Business: and the Law Business is published by Macmillan (London) 1989. Dr Mackie is a member of the Business Strategy Network and a consultant in business strategy.This paper has been adapted from Mackie, Lawyers in Business: and the Law Business (1989), (London: Macmillan), ch. 10.