Ethical perspectives on the foreign direct investment decision

This paper examines the foreign direct investment decision from an ethical perspective, and considers the moral agency involved in such decisions, with emphasis upon the corporate decision-maker. Historical capital allocation models once regarded as both financially and ethically normative are shown to be deficient in today's environment. Work of modern western philososphical and theological ethicists is included in analyses of the applicability of selected ethical approaches or metaphors to multinational foreign direct investment decisions and the corporate manager's role and responsibility as corporate decision-maker and moral agent. The ethical perspectives reviewed can serve as an aid to the individual manager's determination of what constitutes a responsible exercise of decision-making power. Marjorie T. Stanley is Professor of Finance, M. J. Neeley School of Business, Texas Christian University. She was visiting Professor of Finance and Scholar in Residence, Institute for Business Ethics, DePaul University, 1986–87. She has related publications in, e.g., Ethics and the Multinational Enterprise (ed., Hoffman, et al), Journal of International Business Studies, California Management Review, The Financial Review, and Management International Review.     

The other 338: Why a majority of our schools of business administration do not offer a course in business ethics

A recent survey indicated that the majority of schools of business administration do not offer courses in business ethics and/or the social responsibilities of business firms. The author examines the reasons for the omission of these courses, and concludes that faculty in the major disciplines and techniques of management do not recognize the complexity of ethical problems or the importance of ethical decisions in the overall management of large business organizations. La Rue Hosmer is Professor of Policy and Control at the Graduate School of Business Administration of the University of Michigan. He has A.B., M.B.A., and D.B.A. degrees from Harvard University, and was the founder and president of a company that manufactured heavy equipment for sawmills and papermills. He has been teaching Business Policy, Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship at The University of Michigan since 1972, with visiting appointments during that period at Stanford and Yale. His research interests are in managerial ethics, corporate responsibility and strategic implementation. He is the co-author of The Entrepreneurial Function (Prentice-Hall, 1977) and the author of Strategic Management: Text and Cases on Business Policy (Prentice-Hall, 1982), Formation Planning (McGraw-Hill, 1984), and Managerial Ethics (in press).     

An Exploration into the Developmental Psychology of Ethical Theory with Implications for Business Practice and Pedagogy

This article is an attempt to understand ethical theory not just as a set of well-developed philosophical perspectives but as a range of moral capacities that human beings more or less grow into over the course of their lives. To this end, we explore the connection between formal ethical theories and stage developmental psychologies, showing how individuals mature morally, regarding their duties, responsibilities, ideals, goals, values, and interests. The primary method is to extract from the writings of Kohlberg and his students the cues that help to flesh out a developmental picture of a wide range of ethical perspectives. Thus, developmental psychology benefits from gaining a broader understanding of “morality” and “ethics,” and ethical theory benefits from a richer understanding of how moral maturity arises from youthful beginnings in juvenile and adolescent thinking. Results of this study offer insight into the difficulty of teaching ethics and a refined ability to assess moral maturity in business activity. F. Neil Brady is the Jack R. Wheatley Professor of Management Ethics in the Romney Institute of Public Management and a member of the Ethics Group at the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. He has published over thirty articles on ethics in a variety of journals including the Academy of Management Review, Administration & Society, and the Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. He has authored Ethical Managing (Macmillan 1990) and edited Ethical Universals in International Business (Springer Verlag 1996). For twenty years, his research has focused on the application of ethical theory to managerial decisions. David W. Hart is assistant professor of public management in the Romney Institute of Public Management and a member of the Ethics Group at the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University. He received his PhD from the State University of New York at Albany. His current research focuses on administrative ethics, business-government interaction, and the external environment of organizations. He has published in a variety of journals and is the co-author of a book. Wall Street Polices Itself: How Securities Firms Manage the Legal Hazards of Competitive Pressures (Oxford University Press, 1998).     

Differences in ethical perceptions between male and female managers: Myth or reality?

This study sought to identify whether or not differences exist between the ethical decisions of male and female managers; and, if they do exist, to identify the areas in which differences occurred. An additional evaluation was conducted to determine how each perceived their counterpart would respond to the same ethical decision making situations.Data were collected from 50 male managers and 50 female managers by means of a self-administered questionnaire. Distinctive demographic characteristics were noted among the segments.The results showed only one area where a significant difference existed between males and females on what they considered to be ethical. However, there were significant differences in 16 out of 17 situations when they rated the ethical behavior of their male/female counterparts, i.e., males rated females as being significantly less ethical than themselves and vice versa.Jeaneen M. Kidwell is Corporate Sales Trainer of Avon Products, Inc. Robert E. Stevens is Professor of Marketing at Northeast Louisiana University. He is the author of five books and over thirty articles have appeared in Journal of Purchasing, Journal of Retailing, Business Horizons, and Supervising Management. Art L. Bethke is Associate Professor of Management at Northeast Louisiana University. He has been awarded Senior Professional in Human Resources 1982 and 1985. His articles have been published in Supervisory Management, Personnel Administrator, and Review of Business and Economic Research.     

Google in China: A Manager-Friendly Heuristic Model for Resolving Cross-Cultural Ethical Conflicts

Management practitioners and scholars have worked diligently to identify methods for ethical decision making in international contexts. Theoretical frameworks such as Integrative Social Contracts Theory (Donaldson and Dunfee, 1994, Academy of Management Review 19, 252–284) and more recently the Global Business Citizenship Approach [Wood et al., 2006, Global Business Citizenship: A Transformative Framework for Ethics and Sustainable Capitalism. (M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY)] have produced innovations in practice. Despite these advances, many managers have difficulty implementing these theoretical concepts in daily practice. Using the example of recent decisions by internet service providers Google, Yahoo, and MSN regarding censorship requirements in China, we offer six heuristic questions to help managers to resolve cross-cultural ethical conflicts in which the firm’s way of doing business differs from the practice in the host country. Recognizing that companies can take different approaches to law and ethics (Paine, 1994, Harvard Business Review 72(2), 107–117), our aim is to provide a management decision process to deal with demands or opportunities for engaging in questionable business practices in a host country.     

Can business ethics be theological? What Athens can learn from Jerusalem

The work of philosophers in business ethics has been important in providing a systematic framework to analyze moral obligations of corporations and their many stakeholders. Yet the field of ethics as defined by the philosophers of the past two centuries is too narrow to do justice to what is at stake in the business world. Ethics in the theological perspective is not primarily concerned with analyzing situations so that one can make right decisions, but rather with reflecting on what is constitutive of the good life. Theological business ethics can apply a crucial corrective to the business ethics of philosophers by broadening the endeavor to include a vision of what constitutes a good life — of the kind of persons we want to be and the kind of communities we want to form. Oliver F. Williams, C.S.C., is on the faculty of the Department of Management at the University of Notre Dame where he teaches and researches in the field of business, society and ethics. He holds a Ph.D. in theology from Vanderbilt University and has had the experience of a research year at the Graduate School of Business Administration of Stanford University. His publications include five books, the most recent of which is The Apartheid Crisis: How We Can Do Justice in a Land of Violence (Harper & Row). He has published articles on business ethics in journals including Theology Today, California Management Review, Harvard Business Review and Business Horizons.     

Personal Values’ Influence on the Ethical Dimension of Decision Making

Personal values have long been associated with individual decision behavior. The role played by personal values in decision making within an organization is less clear. Past research has found that managers tend to respond to ethical dilemmas situationally. This study examines the relationship between personal values and the ethical dimension of decision making using Partial Least Squares (PLS) analysis. The study examines personal values as they relate to five types of ethical dilemmas. We found a significant positive contribution of altruistic values to ethical decision making and a significant negative contribution of self-enhancement values to ethical decision making. Dr. David J. Fritzsche is a retired Professor of Management and Organization at The Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley. Among the numerous journals in which he published are Journal of Business Ethics, Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Macromarketing, and Simulation & Games. He is the co-author of the Business Policy Game: A Strategic Management Simulation. He authoured the book Business Ethics: A Global and Managerial Perspective (McGraw-Hill, 1997). Dr. Effy Oz is a Professor of Management Science and Information Systems at The Pennsylvania State University, Great Valley, where he teaches courses on IT management, ethical issues in IT, and business-stakeholder relations. He has authored several textbooks including five editions of Management Information Systems (Course Technology Inc., 1998–2006), Foundations of E-Commerce (Prentice-Hall, 2002) and, Ethics for the Information Age (McGraw-Hill, 1994), and a practitioner’s book (The Manager’s Bible, Ivy League Publishing, 1998). He has also published research articles in academic and professional journals, among which are MIS Quarterly, Communications of the ACM, Information & Management, Decisions Sciences, OMEGA, Journal of Business Ethics, and Journal of Computer Information Systems. Dr. Oz is a member of the editorial boards of Encyclopaedia of Information Systems, Information & Management, and Journal of Global Information Technology Management. He is a frequent speaker at IT conferences, has conducted research on a number of IT topics, and has been quoted in numerous media including Computerworld, MSNBC, and the Los Angeles Times. He was awarded the 1997 Notable Contribution to the Information Systems Literature Award by the Information Systems Section of the American Accounting Association, the 1999-2000 Distinguished Faculty Research Award at Penn State Great Valley, and Best Paper Award at the Annual Global Information Technology Conference of 2004.     

Cultural and Ethical Effects on Managerial Decisions: Examined in a Throughput Model

Financial and cost accounting information is processed by decision-makers guided by their particular need to support decisions. Recent technological advances impacting on information as well as organizations such as the European Community mandating financial reporting requirements for many countries is rapidly changing the landscape for decision making using accounting information. Hence, the importance of individuals' decision making is more important than it was previously. These decisions are also influenced by individuals' ethical beliefs. The Throughput Modeling approach to cultural and ethical concerns provides a way of dealing with accounting information processed through various pathways by decision-makers. This modeling approach captures different philosophical perspectives from which to understand what is involved in "thinking scientifically." In the Throughput Modeling approach, pathways highlight the importance of how different philosophical perspectives may be used by individuals in arriving at a decision. This paper highlights key concepts involved in rethinking the basis of moral decision making in terms of an underlying process, rather than focusing on the application of principles or the development of a virtuous character. Examples are provided from both English and Spanish settings to help emphasize the importance of modeling ethical decision making globally.     

Retailers' professional and professio-ethical dilemmas: The case of Finnish retailing business

The main purpose of this paper is to put forth the concept of ethics, present ethical theories and, finally, consider some business ethics issues in the context of retailing practices. In the first part of this paper we seek to motivate the research task. The importance of conducting ethical analysis is stressed. In the second part of the paper several ethical theories: utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics are presented. This part serves as a basis for research interviews, e.g. it is possible to examine retailers' opinions about their professional virtues, and try to position these opinions in relation with utilitarianism and deontology. In the third part the empirical findings about the retailing business ethics are set forth. This part suggests that there prevails among retailers some kind of confusion about what are ethical issues and what is not ethical in their daily professional practices. To avoid this confusion four main principles were put forth by the Finnish retailers. The principles were: 1. Freedom versus rules; 2. Principles versus moralizing; 3. Boundaries versus transition; 4. Economy and moral versus subjective judgment.Tuomo Takala is a Senior Lecturer in Business Administration at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. He studied business economics and practical philosphy. His main research issues are: business ethics, social responsibility issues and environmental issues looked from ethical perspective. He also acted as Acting Professor in Business Administration in Jyväskylä. His previous publishing areas are:Publications from the Department of Economics and Management, University of Jyväskylä andScandinavian Journal of Management.Outi Usitalo is an Assistant in Marketing at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. She studied business economics. Her research interests focus on consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction with market supply conditions, the consequences of marketing activities on consumer welfare, and the equity and effectiveness of retailers. She published inPublications from the Department of Economics and Management, University of Jyväskylä.     

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.     

Linking management behavior to ethical philosophy

This study investigates current linkages between ethical theory and management behavior. The vignettes used in this investigation represent ethical dilemmas in the areas of coercion and control, conflict of interest, physical environment, and personal integrity. The results indicate that even with the heightened state of ethical awareness that has evolved in recent years the link between ethical philosophy and management behavior remains basically the same as it was in the mid 1980s. Specifically, practitioners still rely almost totally on the utilitarian ethical philosophy when making business decisions.Shane R. Premeaux is a Professor of Marketing, and the Associate Dean at McNeese State University, Lake Charles, Louisiana. He is an avid author with over fifty articles appearing in such journals asPersonnel, Peronnel Journal, Personnel Administrator, Transportation Journal, theLogistics and Transportation Review, and theJournal of Small Business Management. He has also co-authored books entitled:Personal Selling: Function, Theory, and Practice, 3rd ed.,Supervision, 2nd ed.,Human Resources Management, 4th ed.,Management and Organization Behavior, 1st ed., andManagement Concepts, Practices, and Skills, 5th ed.R. Wayne Mondy is a Professor of Management and Dean of the College of Business at McNeese State University. Dr. Mondy has authored or co-authored seven college textbooks, two trade books, fifty-one articles, and twenty papers. Dr. Mondy is an avid author with numerous articles in various refereed journals. He has coauthored the following books:Staffing the Contemporary Organization, 1st ed.,Personal Selling: Function, Theory, and Practice, 3rd ed.,Supervision, 2nd ed.,Human Resources Management, 4th ed.,Management and Organizational Behavior, 1st ed., andManagement Concepts, Practices, and Skills, 5th ed.     

Defining the ethical standards of the high-technology industry

At least five sets of ethical standards influence business people's decisions: general cultural, company, personal, situational, and industry standards. Each has an official or espoused form encoded in written documents such as policy statements and codes of ethics and an unofficial form that develops as people use the espoused standards. (We call these unofficial standards values in action.) To determine whether the high-technology industry deserves its reputation for moral laxness, a pilot questionnaire was designed. It asked employees to rate the acceptability in the workplace of ethical behaviors relating to safety, third parties, and cheating the company. The findings show that employees in high-and low-technology industries uphold espoused values of safety. Relations with third parties are influenced by the existence of company codes of ethics, especially in small companies. Actions involving cheating the company need to be investigated further.Nancie Fimbel is an Associate Professor of Business Ethics and Business Communication at the School of Business, San Jose State University. Jerome S. Burstein is the author of Computers and Information Systems (2nd ed.), a popular textbook in computer science. He is an Associate Professor of Information Resource Management at the School of Business, San Jose State University.     

The moral authority of transnational corporate codes

Ethical guidelines for multinational corporations are included in several international accords adopted during the past four decades. These guidelines attempt to influence the practices of multinational enterprises in such areas as employment relations, consumer protection, environmental pollution, political participation, and basic human rights. Their moral authority rests upon the competing principles of national sovereignty, social equity, market integrity, and human rights. Both deontological principles and experience-based value systems undergird and justify the primacy of human rights as the fundamental moral authority of these transnational and transcultural compacts. Although difficulties and obstacles abound in gaining operational acceptance of such codes of conduct, it is possible to argue that their guidelines betoken the emergence of a transcultural corporate ethic. William C. Frederick is Professor of Business Administration, Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh. He is President (1990) of the Society for Business Ethics, former chair of the Social Issues in Management division of The Academy of Management, and was the Charles Dirksen Professor of Business Ethics at Santa Clara University in 1980–81. He is coauthor of Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics (McGraw-Hill, 1988).     

Managerial morality and behavior: The questionable payments issue

This research examined the effect of managers' value systems and personality traits on ethical decision behavior, in the context of questionable payments to foreign officials to assure business. Using a complex international management game to simulate the real-world competitive business environment, the study measured the instrumental and terminal value systems of the game participants as well as their tendencies towards Machiavellianism. It then observed their decision behavior in response to what was clearly a demand for an illegal payment.The findings indicate that ethical values, in most instances, were subordinated to the manager's duty to achieve company goals. They also revealed that the inner conflict between what was professed as right, and what had to be done in practice, was generally resolved on the basis of utility rather than on ethical or moral grounds. Richard D. Rosenberg is Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management at Technion — Israel Institute of Technology. He has written several articles which have been published e.g., Industrial and Labor Relations Review; Industrial Relations; and Industrial Marketing Management.The guidance and suggestions of Professor Y. Rim and Dr. M. Erez of the Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management at the Technion are gratefully acknowledged.     

An integrative model for understanding and managing ethical behavior in business organizations

Managing ethical behavior is a one of the most pervasive and complex problems facing business organizations today. Employees' decisions to behave ethically or unethically are influenced by a myriad of individual and situational factors. Background, personality, decision history, managerial philosophy, and reinforcement are but a few of the factors which have been identified by researchers as determinants of employees' behavior when faced with ethical dilemmas. The literature related to ethical behavior is reviewed in this article, and a model for understanding ethical behavior in business organizations is proposed. It is concluded that managing ethics in business organizations requires that managers engage in a concentrated effort which involves espousing ethics, behaving ethically, developing screening mechanisms, providing ethical training, creating ethics units and reinforcing ethical behavior. W. Edward Stead, Ph.D., is Professor of Management at East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN. His research interests include ethical behavior, cancer in the workplace, social strategy implementation, the ethical implications of cost-benefit analysis, and managing professional employees. His articles have appeared in Psychological Reports, Personnel Journal, Business and Society Review, and the Journal of Accountancy among others, and he has published cases in leading business policy and social responsibility texts. Dan L. Worrell, Ph.D., is Professor of Management and Department Chairperson at Appalachian State University, Boone, NC. He has published articles in such Journals as Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Management, Business Horizons, and Psychological Reports among others. His research interests include managerial succession, ethical behavior and social responsibility. Jean Garner Stead, Ph.D., is Associate Professor of Management at East Tennessee State University, Johnson City, TN. Her research interests include ethical behavior, cancer in the work place, social strategy implementation, and the ethical implications of cost-benefit analysis. Her articles have appeared in Psychological Reports, Personnel Journal, Business and Society Review and the International Journal of Management among others, and she has published cases in leading business policy and social responsibility texts.     

Linking Linear/Nonlinear Thinking Style Balance and Managerial Ethical Decision-Making

This study presents the results of an empirical analysis of the relationship between managerial thinking style and ethical decision-making. Data from 200 managers across multiple organizations and industries demonstrated that managers predominantly adopt a utilitarian perspective when forming ethical intent across a series of business ethics vignettes. Consistent with expectations, managers utilizing a balanced linear/nonlinear thinking style demonstrated a greater overall willingness to provide ethical decisions across ethics vignettes compared to managers with a predominantly linear thinking style. However, results comparing the ethical decision-making of balanced thinking managers and nonlinear thinking managers were generally inconsistent across the ethics vignettes. Unexpectedly, managers utilizing a balanced linear/nonlinear thinking style were least likely to adopt an act utilitarian rationale for ethical decision-making across the vignettes, suggesting that balanced thinkers may be more likely to produce ethical decisions by considering a wider range of alternatives and ruling out those that are justified solely on the basis of their outcomes. Implications are discussed for future research and practice related to management education and development, and ethical decision-making theory. Kevin S. Groves is an Assistant Professor of Management and Director of the PepsiCo Leadership Center at California State University, Los Angles. His research interests include managerial thinking styles, ethical decision-making, executive leadership development and succession planning systems, charismatic leadership, and leader emotional intelligence. He teaches undergraduate, MBA, and doctoral-level classes across a range of management and leadership subjects, including management competency development, organizational behavior, business ethics, and organization development and change. Dr. Groves’ recent research has been published in such journals as the Journal of Management, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Journal of Management Development, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Journal of Management Education, and the Academy of Management Learning & Education. He received a Ph.D. in Organizational Behaviour from Claremont Graduate University. Charles Vance teaches in the area of human resource management at Loyola Marymount University. He recently completed Senior Specialist and regular Fulbright appointments in Austria and China respectively. He is the author with Yongsun Paik of the new text, Managing a Global Workforce, (M.E. Sharpe, 2006). His nonlinear penchant is expressed quarterly in cartoons and other attempts at humor in the ending “Out of Whack” section of the Journal of Management Inquiry. Dr. Yongsun Paik is a professor of international business and management in the College of Business Administration, Loyola Marmount University. He holds a Ph. D. degree in International Business from University Washington. His primary research interests focus on international human resource management, global strategic alliances, and Asia Pacific business studies. He has recently published articles in such journals as Journal of World Business, Management International Review, Journal of International Managemtn, Business Horizons, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of Management Inquiry, Human Resource Management Journal, among others.     

Corporate conscience and foreign divestment decisions

The rational-agent frame of reference for the analysis of corporate strategic decision-making may be expanded to a moral-agent perspective where decision content is seen as comprising both commercial and ethical factors. Relevant factors may then be classified on the basis of the ethical decision principles to which they relate: rational-egoism, self-referential altruism or deontology. This approach is then applied to the problem of decision support for strategic divestment by MNCs. Alan E. Singer is Senior Lecturer in Business Policy and Decision Sciences at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. He has written several articles which have been published in journals like Accountancy, Decision Sciences, Journal of Business Ethics and Management Research News.Nicholas van der Walt is Lecturer at the University of Canterbury.     

The Nature and Management of Ethical Corporate Identity: A Commentary on Corporate Identity,Corporate Social Responsibility and Ethics

In this paper we open up the topic of ethical corporate identity: what we believe to be a new, as well as highly salient, field of inquiry for scholarship in ethics and corporate social responsibility. Taking as our starting point Balmer’s (in Balmer and Greyser, 2002) AC²ID test model of corporate identity – a pragmatic tool of identity management – we explore the specificities of an ethical form of corporate identity. We draw key insights from conceptualizations of corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory. We argue ethical identity potentially takes us beyond the personification of the corporation. Instead, ethical identity is seen to be formed relationally, between parties, within a community of business and social exchange. Extending the AC²ID test model, we suggest the management of ethical identity requires a more socially, dialogically embedded kind of corporate practice and greater levels of critical reflexivity. John M. T. Balmer is Professor of Corporate Brand/Identity Management at Bradford University School of Management. His research focuses on a range of corporate-level marketing issues and has a particular interest in the management of corporate brands and identities. His work has been published in leading journals such as California Management Review and Long Range Planning. With Stephen Greyser he co-authored Revealing the Corporation (Routledge, 2003). Kyoko Fukukawa is a lecturer in marketing at Bradford University School of Management and holds a Ph.D. from University of Nottingham, UK. Her research interests include ethical decision-making in consumption and business practices; corporate social responsibility (CSR) of MNCs concerning their policies and strategic communication; and CSR and corporate branding. Her publications appear in Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Corporate Citizenship and others. Edmund R. Gray is Professor and Chair in the Department of Management at Loyola Marymount University. He is author or co-author of five textbooks and numerous scholarly articles. He holds a Ph.D. from UCLA. His research interests centre around issues of corporate identity, corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability. Currently, he is conducting research on entrepreneurial firms with environmental/social goals that are an integral part of their mission.     

Privacy versus accessibility: The impact of situationally conditioned belief

The information age we are living in and the technology that supports it, raises new ethical concerns. Among these concerns are privacy — the rights of individuals to withold information they consider sensitive, and accessibility — the rights of individuals to obtain information that is relevant to the decisions they must make. Arguments about potential impacts of information technology on privacy and accessibility mask and underlying conflict — that one person's beliefs about their right to relevant information is likely to conflict with another person's belief's about their right to withold information they consider sensitive. This paper proposes that the conflict is likely to be a function of the role the individuals plays in the decision making situation — situationally conditioned belief (SCB) — rather than a function of the person's underlying ethical values.This paper presents an empirical study involving information privacy and accessibility in routine business and market decisions, designed to reveal the presence of SCBs. The results indicate that SCBs cause a gap in beliefs about information accessibility and privacy. Impacts of the SCB gap are discussed. A negotiation technique called information exchange is suggested as a means of closing the SCB gap in routine business and market transactions. Dr. Laura Lally received her Ph.D. in Information Systems. Dr. Lally pursues research on the impacts of information technology on a nation's culture, on business profitability, and on the ethical choices faced by individuals. She has published articles in Decision Sciences, the Information Society, the Journal of Global Information Management and in the Journal of End User Computing. She is currently investigating the risk factors involved in process reengineering under a grant from the National Science Foundation.     

Defining ‘business ethics’: Like nailing jello to a wall

Business ethics is a topic receiving much attention in the literature. However, the term ‘business ethics’ is not adequately defined. Typical definitions refer to the rightness or wrongness of behavior, but not everyone agrees on what is morally right or wrong, good or bad, ethical or unethical. To complicate the problem, nearly all available definitions exist at highly abstract levels. This article focuses on contemporary definitions of business ethics by business writers and professionals and on possible areas of agreement among the available definitions. Then a definition is synthesized that is broad enough to cover the field of management in a sense as full as most managers might conceive of it. Phillip V. Lewis is Professor of Management and Chairman of the Department of Management Sciences at Abilene Christian University. His most important publications includeOrganizational Communication: The Essence of Effective Management, Grid (1975, 1980), andManaging Human Relations, Kent (1983).