A critical evaluation of Etzioni's socioeconomic theory: Implications for the field of business ethics

Given the pervasive influence of neoclassical economic theory on the field of business, the opposition of the standard economists to the inclusion of moral factors in economic decisions provides an intellectual resistance to the ideas of many business ethicists. Etzioni (1988) offers a theoretical alternative to the neoclassical model, an alternative that includes a moral dimension. This article: (1) highlights the differences between Etzioni's proposed model and the neoclassical economic paradigm; (2) describes and critically evaluates Etzioni's proposed theory in view of his objective of synthesizing the neoclassical paradigm with a duty-based morality; and (3) discusses the implications of Etzioni's proposed paradigm for the field of business ethics.Diane Swanson is an Assistant Professor of finance and economics at Robert Morris College in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. She is also a doctoral student in Business Environment and Public Policy at the Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh.     

Normative Self-Interest or Moral Hypocrisy?: The Importance of Context

We re-examine the construct of Moral Hypocrisy from the perspective of normative self-interest. Arguing that some degree of self-interest is culturally acceptable and indeed expected, we postulate that a pattern of behavior is more indicative of moral hypocrisy than a single action. Contrary to previous findings, our results indicate that a significant majority of subjects (N = 136) exhibited fair behavior, and that ideals of caring and fairness, when measured in context of the scenario, were predictive of those behaviors. Moreover, measures of Individualism/Collectivism appear more predictive of self-interested behavior than out-of-context responses to moral ideals. Implications for research and practice are discussed. George W. Watson received his Ph.D. from Virginia Tech, his M.B.A. from California State at Fullerton, an M.S. in Systems Management from the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, an a B.A. in Business Administration from the University of Washington, Seattle. His teaching focus is on corporate social responsibility and ethics. Dr.Watson’s current research interests include moral psychology,ethical decision making, and ideology. He has published in Business Ethics Quarterly, Business and Society, and the Journal of Business Ethics. Farooq Sheikh received his BS in Physics from Indiana University of Pennsylvania, and his Ph.D. from Smeal College of Business, Penn State University. He is currently Assistant Professor of Operations Management, School of Business at the State University of New York at Geneseo. Dr. Sheik’s research interests include rational and behavioral models in business operations, bounded-rational behavioral models in population games, social norms, game theory and cross-disciplinary research involving behavioral models.     

Evaluating Stakeholder Theory

This paper is the third in a series of four that is directed at understanding and assessing stakeholder theory for the purposes of business ethics. It addresses the suitability and viability of the theory, rejecting objections of a moral and efficiency sort based (respectively) on claims about property rights and the economic superiority of the alternative stockholder approach, but accepting that implementation problems require limiting both the number of groupings admitted to stakeholder status and the degree of responsibility towards them. The conclusion looks forward to the construction of a suitably limited version of the stakeholder approach in a fourth paper drawing upon this one and the previous two.John Kaler teachers at the University of Plymonth Business School. He is the co-author of An Introduction to Business Ethics (Chapman and Hall, 1993; ITP, 1996) and Essentials of Business Ethics (McGraw-Hill, 1996), and co-editor of the ‘Teaching Business Ethics’ website hosted by the Institute of Business Ethics.     

Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting

This paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requirements, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission, values, and management systems. Habermas’ theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse. MaryAnn Reynolds is an Associate Professor of Accounting in the College of Business and Economics at Western Washington University. Dr. Reynolds teaches intermediate financial accounting and is published in the areas of corporate social, environmental and ethical reporting. Kristi Yuthas is the Swigert Endowed Information Systems Professor in the School of Business Administration at Portland State University. Dr. Yuthas teaches accounting and information systems and is published in the areas of social and ethical impacts of management information systems.     

Observers’ Impressions of Unethical Persons and Whistleblowers

Since there have been many recent occurrences of alleged wrongdoing by business persons and other professionals, it seems additional ethics research is needed to obtain knowledge that will impact real-world behavior. An empirical study assessed business students’ impressions of hypothetical wrongdoers and whistleblowers. To some extent, impressions of an unethical executive and a whistleblower were influenced by the same variables and in opposite directions. Female respondents judged the unethical executive less favorably and the whistleblower more favorably than did males. The executive was rated less favorably and the whistleblower more favorably when the executive sought a small gain than when the goal was a large gain or prevention of a loss of either magnitude. Some manipulations, however, impacted impressions of one actor, but not the other. Perhaps ethics training can make students aware that issue␣framing and moral intensity components may bias decisions. Wayne H. Decker, Ph.D. (University of Pittsburgh) is a Professor of Management and former Chair of the Management and Marketing Department in the Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University. His publications include articles in the Journal of Managerial Issues, Journal of Applied Business Research, Journal of Business and Enterpreneurship, Review of Business Research, Journal of Retail Banking, and Real Estate Finance. His current research interests are ethics, managerial humor, leadership, and career development. Thomas J. Calo, Ed.D. (George Washington University) is a Lecturer in Management in the Perdue School of Business at Salisbury University. He is a former corporate and public sector human resources executive who is now teaching full-time. He is a Certified Professional of the International Public Management Association for Human Resources. His reseearch interests are in the areas of business ethics, leadership, and the psychosocial aspects of mid-career professionals.     

Ethical Leadership for the Professions: Fostering a Moral Community

This paper examines the professions as examples of “moral community” and explores how professional leaders possessed of moral intelligence can make a contribution to enhance the ethical fabric of their communities. The paper offers a model of ethical leadership in the professional business sector that will improve our understanding of how ethical behavior in the professions confers legitimacy and sustainability necessary to achieving the professions’ goals, and how a leadership approach to ethics can serve as an effective tool for the dissemination of moral values in the organization. Dr. Linda M. Sama is Director of the Center for International Business Development and Associate Professor of Management at Pace University’s Lubin School of Business. She earned her Ph.D. in Strategic management from the City University of New York and her MBA in International Finance from McGill University. She was awarded the 1999 Lasdon Dissertation Award for her doctoral dissertation on corporate social response strategies and the Abraham Briloff Award of Best Paper in Business Ethics at the City University of New York in 1998. Dr. Sama made a transition to academe after a lengthy career in industry, where she acted as Director of Market Planning and Logistics for a major international subsidiary of Transamerica Corporation. She teaches primarily in the areas of International Business, Strategic Managements and Business Ethics, and has taught at Baruch College and the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) prior to coming to Pace in the fall of 2001. At UTEP, she was designated as the Skno International Business Ethics Scholar from 1999–2001. She has published numerous articles and book chapters that address issues of corporate social responsibility, business and the natural environment, integrative social contracts theory, and business ethics dilemmas in the new economy. Her research appears in journals such as The Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business and Society Review, The Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, and the International Journal of Value-Based Management. She has also published research for the U.S. Department of Transportation related to the effects of NAFTA on U.S. – Mexico border logistics and has consulted to business clients on Strategic Planning, Global Leadership and Business Ethics. Dr. Victoria Shoaf is an Associate Professor and Assistant Chair of the Department of Accounting and Taxation at St. John’s University. She received her Ph.D. in Business, with a specialization in Accounting, from Baruch College of the City University of New York in 1997; she was awarded the 1997 Lasdon Dissertation Award. Prior to joining St. John’s University on a full-time basis, Dr.Shoaf worked for over fifteen years in the retail industry with merchandising firms. Her expertise is in establishing effective accounting systems and controls, including operational functions such as order entry and fulfillment, inventory control, point-of-sale data transfers and sales audit, as well as financial accounting functions. She has held controllership positions at Laura Ashley, Inc., Greeff Fabrics, Inc., and Tie Rack, Inc. While working in industry and while completing her doctoral degree, Dr. Shoaf taught accounting courses as an adjunct instructor at Pace University and at Baruch College. She received a commendation from the dean at Pace University for teaching excellence, and she was awarded a Graduate Teaching Fellowship at Baruch College. She currently serves on several professional committees, and she has provided consulting services in accounting education and training programs for several large employers.     

The Struggle Against Sweatshops: Moving Toward Responsible Global Business

Today’s sweatshops violate our notions of justice, yet they continue to flourish. This is so because we have not settled on criteria that would allow us to condemn and do away with them and because the poor working conditions in certain places are preferable to the alternative of no job at all. In this paper, we examine these phenomena. We consider the definitional dilemmas posed by sweatshops by routing a standard definition of sweatshops through the precepts put forward in the literature on justice and virtue ethics. We conclude that fixing on definitions is pointless and misleading and that we are better off looking at whether or not a workplace violates the basic human rights of workers and whether or not the working conditions there cohere with situations on which we have already rendered judgments. In the end, we suggest guidelines for businesses that operate in the global workplace to help them avoid charges of running sweatshops. These recommendations account for the harsh living conditions in certain developing and emerging countries as well as the norms of societies in developed countries. * A summer research grant from the Frank G. Zarb School of Business at Hofstra University contributed toward making this research possible. Tara J. Radin is Visiting Assistant Professor in the Legal Studies and Business Ethics Department at the Wharton School and Assistant Director of The American College Center for Ethics in Financial Services. She earned a J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law and an M.B.A. and Ph.D. in Management from the Darden School at the University of Virginia. Her research encompasses topics such as employment, global labor practices, technology, privacy, corporate governance, and stakeholder theory, and includes publications in journals such as Business Ethics Quarterly, Journal of Business Ethics, and American Business Law Journal. She is also co-author of Employment and Employee Rights, published by Blackwell Publishers, Ltd. Martin Calkins is Assistant Professor in the College of Management at the University of Massachusetts Boston. He earned a Ph.D. in management from the University of Virginia, M.Div. and Th.M. degrees in theology from the Weston School of Theology, and an M.I.M. in international management from the American Graduate School of International Management. His academic interests include moral theory (in particular, casuistry and virtue theory) as well as contemporary international business issues such as international codes, whistleblowing, sweatshops, and the impact of computer and Internet technologies on societies.     

Social Contracting in a Pluralist Process of Moral Sense Making: A Dialogic Twist on the ISCT

This paper applies Wempe’s (2005, Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1), 113–135) boundary conditions that define the external and internal logics for contractarian business ethics theory, as a system of argumentation for evaluating current or prospective institutional arrangements for arriving at the “good life,” based on the principles and practices of social justice. It does so by showing that a more dynamic, process-oriented, and pluralist ‘dialogic twist’ to Donaldson and Dunfee’s (2003, ‘Social Contracts: sic et non’, in P. Heugens, H. van Oosterhout and J. Vromen (eds.), The Social Institutions of Capitalism: Evolution and Design of Social Contracts (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd.) pp. 109–126; 1999, Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics (Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press); 1995, Economics and Philosophy 11(1), 85–112; 1994, Academy of Management Review 19(2), 252–284.) integrated social contracting theory (ISCT) of economic ethics will further develop this promising and influential approach to moral reasoning, ethical decision-making, and stakeholder governance. This evolutionary, interactive learning-based model of ethical norm generation via dialogic stakeholder engagement is particularly appropriate within economic communities that are experiencing value conflict and pressures for institutional change.Jerry M. Calton is Professor of Management at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. His research interests encompass multi-stakeholder learning dialogue, trust-based network governance, and the social contracting approach to ethical decision-making. His publications have appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Society, Business Ethics Quarterly, the Journal of Corporate Citizenship, and elsewhere.     

For or Against Corporate Identity? Personification and the Problem of Moral Agency

This article explores the concept of corporate identity from a moral perspective. In it we argue that the reification and personification involved in attributing an identity to an organization has moral repercussions. Through a discussion of ‘intentionality’ we suggest that it is philosophically problematic to treat an abstraction of the corporation as possessing identity or acting as a conscious moral agent. The article moves to consider practical and ethical issues in the areas of organizational commitment, of health and safety, and corporate social responsibility, and finds that the notion of identity can be abused, although it will no doubt continue to be used as it does have some practical utility. In conclusion, we argue that despite being meaningless from a philosophical stance, the concept of corporate identity need not be discarded, however, it is far from benign and intense moral scrutiny is necessary wherever it is applied. Ian Ashman PhD is a senior lecturer in the HRM division of the Lancashire business School, University of Central Lancashire. He has recently authored a number of papers on business ethics, leadership and research methods, all of which draw upon his interest in philosophies of existential phenomenology. He is an executive member of European Business Ethics Network U.K. Professor Diana Winstanley PhD, FCIPD was Director of Postgraduate Programmes at Kingston Business School, Kingston University. She wrote over 50 articles and five books, including her latest, ‚Personal Effectiveness: A Guide to Action’ (2005, CIPD) and Ethical Issues in Contemporary Human Resource Development (2000, Macmillan). She was a trained humanistic counsellor and an executive member of European Business Ethics Network U.K. Her research interests were in the areas of workplace learning, development, diversity and business ethics. Sadly, Diana Winstanley, died last summer.     

Organizational harm,legal condemnation and stakeholder retaliation: A typology,research agenda and application

The essence of the ethical issues pertinent to business activities is the harm or benefit that occurs as part of a company's resource transformation process. A typology is developed that sorts ethical issues according to three variables: (1) the nature of the harm, (2) the nature of those harmed and (3) the transformation stage where the harm occurs. Propositions are formulated that would enable analysts and practitioners to predict the degree of legal condemnation of, and stakeholder retaliation to, harms generated by questionable moral reasoning. An organizational harm analysis is then constructed as a decision making tool that could supplement cost/benefit analysis.Denis Collins is a Doctoral Candidate at the Katz Graduate School of Business of the University of Pittsburgh and a Research Associate with the BG Productivity and Gainsharing Institute. He has published several articles in the areas of business ethics, social philosophy and participatory management.     

Representational Approaches Matter

This paper raises the question of how ethical issues arising out of social inequities involving international business in developing countries can be represented, and articulates a conceptual framework that identifies and maps four different approaches to representing or making sense of such issues. A fieldwork-based case study on the child labor issue in Pakistan’s soccer ball industry illustrates the argument that representational practices do matter, and that when representational approaches go awry, they end up savaging the well-being of the poor in the developing world. Farzad Rafi Khan holds a Ph.D. in Management from McGill University. He is currently an Assistant Professor at the Suleman Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences, Pakistan.     

Moral Issues and Gender Differences in Ethical Judgment using Reidenbach and Robin’s (1990) Multidimensional Ethics Scale: Implications in Teaching of Business Ethics

In this study, we examined moral issues and gender differences in ethical judgment using Reidenbach and Robin’s [Journal of Business Ethics 9 (1990) 639) multidimensional ethics scale (MES). A total of 340 undergraduate students were asked to provide ethical judgment by rating three moral issues in the MES labeled: ‚sales’, ‚auto’, and ‚retail’ using three ethics theories: moral equity, relativism, and contractualism. We found that female students’ ratings of ethical judgment were consistently higher than that of male students across two out of three moral issues examined (i.e., sales and retails) and ethics theories; providing support for Eagly’s [1987, Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-role Interpretation. (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ, England)] social role theory. After controlling for moral issues, women’s higher ratings of ethical judgment over men’s became statistically non-significant. Theoretical and practical implications based on the study’s findings are provided. Nhung T. Nguyen, assistant professor of human resource management at Towson University, received her Ph.D. in management from Virginia Commonwealth University in 2001. Her research focuses on the use of situational judgement and personality tests in personnel selection, ethics in management education, and the application of meta-analysis and structural equations modeling in organizational research. Her research has appeared in the Journal of Applied Psychology, the International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Applied H.R.M. Research, and Journal of Applied Social Psychology among others. M. Tom Basuray, Professor of Management at Towson University, received his Ph.D. in Business Administration in 1974 from University of Oklahoma. His research interests are in areas of organizational effectiveness, leadership and development. His articles have appeared in Journal of Organizational Change Management, Education & Psychological Measurement, International Journal of Management, Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, and Journal of Experiential Learning and Simulation. He has consulted with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Public Broadcasting Corporation, and various state and municipal government agencies both in Maryland and North Dakota. William P.Smith, Associate Professor of Management in the College of Business and Economics at Towson University, received his Ph.D. in Business Administration from Arizona State University in 1982. His research interests include business ethics, privacy in the workplace and the role of social activism in corporate governance. Donald Kopka, an Assistant Professor at Towson University, received his Ph.D., in International Business from George Washington University in 1995. He teaches Business Strategy, Management Principles, and Entrepreneurship and Small Business, and was Director of the Cornerstone-Professional Experience Program in the College of Business and Economics from 1999–2003. In 2004 he was a Fulbright Scholar in Vietnam where he taught entrepreneurship and business strategy, worked on curriculum development, and conducted ongoing research on supporting industries. Information on his Fulbright experience can be found at his website . His research interests include entrepreneurship, business development, and teaching pedagogy. He formerly ran a property management business, was a program manager at the U.S. Small Business Administration, and served as a Peace Corps Volunteer in the Philippines. Donald N. McCulloh, Lecturer in Management at Towson University, received his M.S. degree in Financial Management from The George Washington Unversity in 1968. He teaches Management Principles and has also taught Leadership. He served as Vice President for Administration and Finance at Towson University until his retirement in 1997, since then he has been a full-time member of the Management faculty. He has also served in the United States Air Force, and worked in several manufacturing industries and the automotive industry. He was Executive Director of a non-profit community development corporation.     

Expressions of corporate social responsibility in U.K. firms

This study examines corporate publications of U.K. firms to investigate the nature of corporate social responsibility disclosure. Using a stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility, our results suggest a hierarchical model of disclosure: from general rhetoric to specific endeavors to implementation and monitoring. Industry differences in attention to specific stakeholder groups are noted. These differences suggest the need to understand the effects on social responsibility disclosure of factors in a firm's immediate operating environment, such as the extent of government regulation and level of competitiveness in the industry. Diana C. Robertson is an Assistant Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Business Ethics at the London Business School. She was previously Assistant Professor of Legal Studies at The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. In 1990, she was awarded the University of Pennsylvania Provost's Award for Distinguished Teaching, and in 1992 she received a Wharton School Undergraduate Teaching Award. Her research interests include the impact of corporate policy, particularly codes of ethics, and compensation and control systems on employees' ethical behaviour, and the diffusion of ethical practices among corporations. She has published articles in the Sloan Management Review, Journal of Business Ethics, Organization Science, and Business Ethics Quarterly.Professional Nigel Nicholson is Chairman of the Organisational Behaviour Group and Director of the Centre for Organisation Research at London Business School. Previously, he led investigations into Individual and Organisational Change at Sheffield University's Social & Applied Psychology Unit, and has also held visiting appointments at American, Canadian and German universities. He has published eight books and over 65 articles on a wide range of topics, and been honoured with an award from the Academy of Management for his contribution to theory.     

Integrative Social Contract Theory and Urban Prosperity Initiatives

Urban communities in 21st century America are facing severe economic challenges, ones that suggest a mandate to contemplate serious changes in the way America does business. The middle class is diminishing in many parts of the country, with consequences for the economy as a whole. When faced with the loss of its economic base, any business community must make some difficult decisions about its proper role and responsibilities. Decisions to support the community must be balanced alongside and against responsibilities to owners, shareholders and relevant “stakeholders” in a relatively new context. Corporations in urban communities “hollowed out” by white flight or urban sprawl must decide what level of support they can and should provide. This paper examines corporate decisions within the emerging urban prosperity initiatives, using the framework of integrative social contract theory proposed by Donaldson and Dunfee. We suggest that urban prosperity initiatives present a mandate on corporations sufficiently strong as to qualify as an authentic norm. Further, we argue that strict adherence to a corporate bottom line approach or “corporate isolationism” is not congruent with contemporary community standards. Anita Cava is an Associate Professor of Business Law at the University of Miami’s School of Business Administration and serves as Co-Director of the University of Miami’s Ethics Programs, a university-wide entity that promotes research, teaching and service across the disciplines in areas of ethical interest and concern, and Director of Business Ethics Programs in the SBA. Professor Cava received her B.A. with Distinction from Swarthmore College and her J.D. from New York University School of Law, where she was a Hays Fellow. She joined the faculty after several years in private practice in Washington, D.C. and Miami. Her experience ranged from national employment cases to commercial and consumer litigation. Professor Cava’s teaching specialties are the legal environment of business and business ethics; here research interests concern legal and ethical aspects of healthcare administration, business ethics and employment issues. She has published in law reviews and business journals on such topics as “Advance Directives: Taking Control of End of Life Decisions,” “Law, Ethics and Management: Toward an Effective Audit” and “The Collision of Rights and s Search for Limits: Free Speech in the Academy and Freedom from Sexual Harassment of Campus”. Recipient of several School of Business Administration Excellence in Teaching Awards, Anita Cava was honored in 1996 by a University-wide Excellence in Teaching Award. She regularly teaches in UM’s well-known Executive MBA Program and has received Teaching Awards from these adult students as well. A frequent speaker on the topic of Business Ethics and Corporate Compliance, Professor Cava’s audiences have included community groups, management trainees, top executives of several corporations, the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce Goals Conference and Leadership Florida, among others. Don Mayer teaches ethics, legal environment of business, and environmental law at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan. He is a full professor in the Department of Management and Marketing at the School of Business. He attended Duke University Law School (J.D., 1973) and Georgetown University Law Center (Master of International and Comparative Law, 1985) and practiced law in North Carolina from 1975–1990 after serving in the United States Air Force from 1973–75. He has taught as a visiting professor at the University of Michigan, California Polytechnic State University, and the University of Iowa. He has been at Oakland University since 1990 and served as Associate Dean in 2000 and 2001. Professor Mayer has published in related areas of international law, environmental law, and corporate ethics. Recent publication include “Fort’s ‘Business as Mediating Institution’-A Holistic View of Corporate Governance and Ethics,” in 41 American Business Law Journal (Summer 2004), “Yes! We Have No Bananas: Forum Non Conveniens and Corporate Evasion,” Academy of Legal Studies International Business Law Review, vol. 4, at 130 (2004), and “Corporate Governance in the Cause of Peace: An Environmental Perspective,” Vanderbilt Transnational Law Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2 (March 2002). An article on corporate free speech and the Nike v. Kasky case is forthcoming in the Business Ethics Quarterly.     

Social and Symbolic Capital and Responsible Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Investigation of SME Narratives

This paper investigates links between social capital and symbolic capital and responsible entrepreneurship in the context of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The source of the primary data was 144 ‘Business Profiles’, written by the owner-managers of small businesses in application for a Small Business Awards competition in 2005. Included in each of these narratives were claims relating to the firms’ contributions to wider society, relationships with customers, employees and stakeholders. These narratives were coded and classified in a framework drawn from Nahapiet and Ghoshal’s (1998, Academy of Management Review 23(2), 242–266) categorisation of social capital. The analysis revealed a range of strategic orientations towards the development of social and symbolic capital, along a conceptual continuum ranging from being responsible for oneself to being responsible for others. Overall, the evidence demonstrates the significance of the power inherent in the social relations of SMEs as a force for ethical behaviour, and suggests that normative theories of the development of social capital may provide ‘competitive advantage’ through responsible behaviour for small business in the global economy.Ted Fuller is a Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Foresight, and Head of the Centre for Entrepreneurship and SME Development, Teesside Business School, University of Teesside.Yumiao Tian is a postgraduate research student in the Centre for Entrepreneurship and SME Development, Teesside Business School, University of Teesside.     

Effects of the Use of the Availability Heuristic on Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations

Recent corporate scandals across various industries have led to an increased focus on research in business ethics, particularly on understanding ethical decision-making. This increased interest is due largely to managers’ desire to reduce the incidence of unwanted behaviors in the workplace. This article examines one major moderator of the ethical decision-making process – moral intensity. In particular, we explore the potential influence of a particular cognitive heuristic – the availability heuristic – on perceptions of moral intensity. It is our contention that moral intensity is a perceptual construct, and that individuals’ use of the availability heuristic will influence perceptions of moral intensity which, in turn, will affect how moral issues are viewed and ultimately resolved. In this article, we present propositions concerning possible relationships between the availabilities of various phenomena and the components that moral intensity comprises, and report on two studies examining the effects of availabilities on two␣of these components: magnitude of consequences and social consensus. Our findings indicated that the availability of consequences associated with an act was positively related to perceptions of the magnitude of consequences of that act. We also found that the availability of others who believe that a particular act is morally acceptable is positively related to perceptions of social consensus that that act is morally acceptable. We posit that our results suggest the possibility that perceptions of moral intensity can be actively influenced to reduce unethical behavior in organizations.     

Managerial Authority as Political Authority: A Retrospective Examination of Christopher McMahon’s Authority and Democracy

An introduction to the March, 2005 symposium “The Political Theory of Organizations: A Retrospective Examination of Christopher McMahon’s Authority and Democracy” held in San Francisco as part of the Society for Business Ethics Group Meeting at the Pacific Division Meetings of the American Philosophical Association. Jeffery Smith is an Assistant Professor and founding Director of the Banta Center for Business, Ethics and Society at the University of Redlands. His current research focuses on communicative ethics and the moral foundations of collaborative decision-making within economic organizations. He is also interested in the role of principles in moral decision-making and the extent to which principled decisions can be made in organizational contexts. Professor Smith’s writings have appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics: A European Review, Southern Journal of Philosophy and in other journals. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota in 2000.     

The Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: United States and European Union Multinational Corporations

This study explores corporate social responsibility (CSR) by conducting a cross-cultural analysis of communication of CSR activities in a total of 16 U.S. and European corporations. Drawing on previous research contrasting two major approaches to CSR initiatives, it was proposed that U.S. companies would tend to communicate about and justify CSR using economic or bottom-line terms and arguments whereas European companies would rely more heavily on language or theories of citizenship, corporate accountability, or moral commitment. Results supported this expectation of difference, with some modification. Specifically, results indicated that EU companies do not value sustainability to the exclusion of financial elements, but instead project sustainability commitments in addition to financial commitments. Further, U.S.-based companies focused more heavily on financial justifications whereas EU-based companies incorporated both financial and sustainability elements in justifying their CSR activities. In addition, wide variance was found in both the prevalence and use of specific CSR-related terminology. Cross-cultural distinctions in this use create implications with regard to measurability and evidence of both strategic and bottom-line impact. Directions for further research are discussed. Laura P. Hartman is a Professor of Business Ethics and Legal Studies in the Management Department in the College of Commerce at DePaul University, as Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs of the University and as Research Director of DePaul’s Institute for Business and Professional Ethics. She is also an invited professor at INSEAD (France), HEC (France), the University of Melbourne, the Université Paul Cezanne Aix Marseille III and the Grenoble Graduate School of Business. She has been published in, among other journals, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business & Society Review, Business Ethics: A European Review, and the Journal of Business Ethics. Robert S. Rubin is an Assistant Professor in the Management Department at DePaul University’s Kellstadt Graduate School of Business. He received his PhD in organizational psychology from Saint Louis University. His current research interests include transformational leadership, leader cynicism, social and emotional individual differences, and management education and development. K. Kathy Dhanda is an Associate Professor at the Department of Management at DePaul University. Her areas of research include sustainable supply chains, environmental networks, marketable permit modeling, sustainable management, and public policy.