Globalizing Business Ethics Research and the Ethical Need to Include the Bottom-of-the-Pyramid Countries: Redefining the Global Triad as Business Systems and Institutions

A majority of the countries in the world are still considered “developing,” with a per capita income of less than U$1,000. Hahn (2008, Journal of Business Ethics 78, 711–721) recently proposed an ambitious business ethics research agenda for integrating the “bottom-of-the-pyramid” countries (Prahalad and Hart, 2002, Strategy and Competition 20, 2–14) through sustainable development and corporate citizenship. Hahn’s work is among the growing field of research in comparative business ethics including the global business ethics index (Michalos, 2008, Journal of Business Ethics 79(1), 9–19; Scholtens and Dam, 2008, Journal of Business Ethics 75(3), 273–284; Tsalikis and Seaton, 2008, Journal of Business Ethics 75(3), 229–238). This article is complementary to Hahn’s work and it advocates an urgent need for business ethics researchers to globally integrate the bottom-of-the-pyramid countries through a fundamental re-definition of the global economic triad, including the United States, Western Europe, and Japan [Ohmae, 1985, Triad Power: The Coming Shape of Global Competition (New York: Free Press)]. The definition that we propose is based on business systems and institutional perspectives that include the bottom-of-the-pyramid countries. We also propose to broaden the research in business ethics to enable comparisons across business systems indifferent income levels.     

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Theory and Practice in a Developing Country Context

After providing an overview of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) research in different contexts, and noting the varied methodologies adopted, two robust CSR conceptualizations – one by Carroll (1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505) and the other by Wood (1991, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691–717) – have been adopted for this research and their integration explored. Using this newly synthesized framework, the research critically examines the CSR approach and philosophy of eight companies that are considered active in CSR in the Lebanese context. The findings suggest the lack of a systematic, focused, and institutionalized approach to CSR and that the understanding and practice of CSR in Lebanon are still grounded in the context of philanthropic action. The findings are qualified within the framework of existing contextual realities and relevant implications drawn accordingly. Dr. Jamali is Assistant Professor of Management at the Olayan School of Business, American University of Beirut. She holds a BA in Public Administartion from the American University of Beirut, and a Ph.D. in Social Policy and Administration, from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. Her research interests encompass corporate social responsibility, public private partnerships, learning organizations and women issues. She worked as an expert consultant on projects funded by the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development, NGOs, and other regional and local public and private firms. She is the author of numerous studies and international peer reviewed publications in various international journals, including the Journal of Management Development, the International Journal of Public Sector Management, the International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Business Process Management Journal, Public Works, Management and Policy and Women in Management Review. Ramez Mirshak Graduated with honors from the American University in Cairo (AUC) with a Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration in February 2001, then worked for two years in Egypt in the field of marketing and management. In 2004–2005, pursued his Masters of Business Administration at the American University of Beirut (AUB), researching primarily issues relating to change management and corporate social responsibility under the supervision of Dr. Dima Jamali, then joined a leading international financial institution as a regional Management Associate, while maintaining links with AUB and working on several research based projects.     

An Examination of the Structure of Executive Compensation and Corporate Social Responsibility: A Canadian Investigation

We explore the extent to which Boards use executive compensation to incite firms to act in accordance with social and environmental objectives (e.g., Johnson, R. and D. Greening: 1999, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 564–578 ; Kane, E. J.: 2002, Journal of Banking and Finance 26, 1919–1933.). We examine the association between executive compensation and corporate social responsibility (CSR) for 77 Canadian firms using three key components of executives’ compensation structure: salary, bonus, and stock options. Similar to prior research (McGuire, J., S. Dow and K. Argheyd: 2003, Journal of Business Ethics 45(4), 341–359), we measure three different aspects of CSR, which include Total CSR as well as CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses. CSR Strengths and CSR Weaknesses capture the positive and negative aspects of CSR, respectively. We find significant positive relationships between: (1) Salary and CSR Weaknesses, (2) Bonus and CSR Strengths, (3) Stock Options and Total CSR; and (4) Stock Options and CSR Strengths. Our findings suggest the importance of the structure of executive compensation in encouraging socially responsible actions, particularly for larger Canadian firms. This in turn suggests that executive compensation can be an effective tool in aligning executives’ welfare with that of the “common good”, which results in more socially responsible firms (Bebchuk, L., J. Fried and D. Walker: 2002, The University of Chicago Law Review 69, 751–846; Zalewski, D.: 2003, Journal of Economic Issues 37(2), 503–509). In addition, our findings suggest the importance of institutional context in influencing the association between executive compensation and CSR. Further implications for practice and research are discussed.Lois. Mahoney is an Assistant Professor at Eastern Michigan University. Her research is focused in the areas of ethics and accounting information systems. She has published in ethics and accounting journals including Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Research on Professional Responsibility and Ethics in Accounting, Information and Organization. Dr. Mahoney has received several research awards, including Best Paper award at the Seventh Symposium on Ethics Research in Accounting. Dr. Mahoney is also actively involved in the American Accounting Association.Linda Thorn is an Associate Professor at York University in Toronto Ontario. Her research focuses on ethical decision making, the ethics of accountants and accounting students and ethical aspects of accounting information. She has published in ethics and accounting journal including among others, Business Ethics Quarterly, Journal of Business Ethics, Contemporary Accounting Research, Behavioral Research in Accounting and Audit: A Journal of Practice in Theory.     

Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Ratings by Spanish Listed Firms

The aim of this paper is to analyze whether a number of firm and industry characteristics, as well as media exposure, are potential determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure practices by Spanish listed firms. Empirical studies have shown that CSR disclosure activism varies across companies, industries, and time (Gray et al., Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8(2), 47–77, 1995; Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 28(3/4), 327–356, 2001; Hackston and Milne, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 9(1), 77–108, 1996; Cormier and Magnan, Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 1(2), 171–195, 2003; Cormier et al., European Accounting Review 14(1), 3–39, 2005), which is usually justified by reference to several theoretical constructs, such as the legitimacy, stakeholder, and agency theories. Our findings evidence that firms with higher CSR ratings present a statistically significant larger size and a higher media exposure, and belong to more environmentally sensitive industries, as compared to firms with lower CSR ratings. However, neither profitability nor leverage seem to explain differences in CSR disclosure practices between Spanish listed firms. The most influential variable for explaining firms’ variation in CSR ratings is media exposure, followed by size and industry. Therefore, it seems that the legitimacy theory, as captured by those variables related to public or social visibility, is the most relevant theory for explaining CSR disclosure practices of Spanish listed firms.     

A NOTE ON MAIL SURVEYS AND RESPONSE RATES IN LOGISTICS RESEARCH

Logistics researchers frequently use mail surveys to collect data. This paper documents the decline in response rates to surveys reported in JBL, and presents a content analysis of mail survey results reported in two leading logistics journals, the Journal of Business Logistics and the International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistic Management. One interesting finding is the more questionnaires mailed out in a given study, the lower the response rate.     

Is Corporate Responsibility Converging? A Comparison of Corporate Responsibility Reporting in the USA, UK, Australia, and Germany

Corporate social reporting, while not mandatory in most countries, has been adopted by many large companies around the world and there are now a variety of competing global standards for non-financial reporting, such as the Global Reporting Initiative and the UN Global Compact. However, while some companies (e.g., Henkel, BHP, Johnson and Johnson) have a long standing tradition in reporting non-financial information, other companies provide only limited information, or in some cases, no information at all. Previous studies have suggested that there are, country and industry-specific, differences in the extent of CSR reports (e.g., Kolk et al.: 2001, Business Strategy and the Environment 10, 15–28; Kolk: 2005, Management International Review 45, 145–166; Maignan and Ralston: 2002, Journal of International Business Studies 33(3), 497–514). However, findings are inconclusive or contradictory and it is often difficult to compare previous studies owing to the idiosyncratic methods used in each study (Graafland et al.: 2004, Journal of Business Ethics 53, 137–152). Furthermore, previous studies have relied mainly on simple measures, such as word counts and page counts of reports, to compare the extent of reporting that may not capture significant differences in the content of the reports. In this article, we seek to overcome some of these deficiencies by using textual analysis software and a more robust statistical method to more objectively and reliably compare the CSR reports of firms in different industries and countries. We examine a sample of leading companies in four countries (US, UK, Australia, and Germany) and test whether or not membership of the Global Compact makes a difference to CSR reporting and is overcoming industry and country specific factors that limit standardization. We conclude that GlobalCompact membership is having an effect only in certain areas of CSR reporting, related to the environment and workers, and that businesses from different countries vary significantly in the extent to which they promote CSR and the CSR issues that they choose to emphasize in their reports. These country differences are argued to be related to the different institutional arrangements in each country.     

Linking Ethics and Risk Management in Taxation: Evidence from an Exploratory Study in Ireland and the UK

Ethical dilemmas involving tax issues were identified by members of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants as posing the most difficult ethical problem for them (Finn et al., Journal of Business Ethics 7(8), pp. 607–609, 1988). The KPMG tax shelter fraud case proves that the tax profession has not gone untainted in the age of numerous accounting and corporate scandals, such as the Enron débacle (Sikka and Hampton, Accounting Forum 29(3), 325–343, 2005). High-profile scandals serve to highlight the problems caused by differences in ethical judgement among accountants and tax practitioners and the issue of ethics has been brought publicly to the forefront of the profession. Nevertheless, the nature and dimension of ethical issues in tax practice have been largely unexplored (Erard, Journal of Public Economics 52(2), 163–197, 1993; Marshall et al., Journal of Business Ethics 17(12), 1265–1279, 1998; Frecknall Hughes, Unpublished PhD Thesis, The University of Leeds, 2002). This research aims to contribute to the debate on ethics in tax practice by reporting interview data on tax practitioners’ perceptions of ethics in the jurisdictions of Ireland and the United Kingdom and exploring the link or equation of ethics with risk management.     

The Significance of Gender in Predicting the Cognitive Moral Development of Business Practitioners Using the Sociomoral Reflection Objective Measure

This study constitutes a contribution to the discussion about moral reasoning in business. Kohlberg’s (1971, in Cognitive Development and Epistemology (Academic Press, New York), 1976, in Moral Development and Behavior: Theory and Research and Social Issues (Holt, Rienhart and Winston, New York)) cognitive moral development (CMD) theory is one explanation of moral reasoning. One unresolved debate on the topic of CMD is the charge that Kohlbergian-type CMD theory is gender biased. This research puts forth the proposal that the issue may be elucidated by exposing an ambiguity in “gender” (Borna and White: 2003, Journal of Business Ethics 47, 89–99; Gentile: 1993, Psychological Science 4(2), 120–122; Unger: 1979, American Psychologist 34(11), 1085–1094). We use the Sociomoral Reflective Objective Measure (SROM) to measure CMD and the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) to measure gender as a psychosocial concept, rather than as a biological classification. The results of our study indicate that high femininity, measured as a psychosocial attribute, is associated with significantly lower Kohlbergian-type CMD scores among business practitioners. Sex moderates the effect of gender on CMD, but only indirectly. Our research also reveals that education plays a significant moderating role in the relationship between gender and moral reasoning. In addition, age has a significant direct effect on CMD scores of business practitioners. Beverly Kracher is an Associate Professor of Business Ethics & Society in the College of Business Administration at Creighton University. Her research areas include moral reasoning in business, e-commerece ethics & online trust, business ethics pedagogy, and business & the environment. Her research appears in Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business & Society, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Teaching Business Ethics, Interdisciplinary Environmental Review and more. Robert P. Marble is an Associate Professor of Decision Sciences in the College of Business Administration at Creighton University. His research is in the areas of information systems implementation, artificial intelligence, and statistical modeling of business processes. He has published in such journals as the European Journal of Information Systems and Information & Management.     

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.     

‘Consumer Ethics: The Role of Acculturation in U.S. Immigrant Populations’

This study examines the role of acculturation in shaping consumers’ views of ethics. Specifically, it examines the relationships between the desire to keep one’s original culture, the desire to adopt the host culture, and the four dimensions of the Muncy and Vitell (Journal of Business Research Ethics 24(4), 297, 1992) consumer ethics scale. Using two separate immigrant populations – one of former Middle-Eastern residents now living in the U.S. and the other of Asian immigrants in the U.S. – results indicate that those who want to keep their original culture are less tolerant of unethical consumer activities, while those who are more willing to adopt the host culture are more tolerant of these same consumer activities. Furthermore, the immigrants in both studies who are more tolerant of unethical consumer activities are those who are generally somewhat younger and with less formal education. The relationship between gender and consumer ethics was not significant.     

Attitudes About Corporate Social Responsibility: Business Student Predictors

Four predictors were posited to affect business student attitudes about the social responsibilities of business, also known as corporate social responsibility (CSR). Applying Forsyth’s (1980, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39, 175–184, 1992, Journal of Business Ethics 11, 461–470) personal moral philosophy model, we found that ethical idealism had a positive relationship with CSR attitudes, and ethical relativism a negative relationship. We also found materialism to be negatively related to CSR attitudes. Spirituality among business students did not significantly predict CSR attitudes. Understanding the relationship between CSR attitudes and the significant predictors has important implications for researchers and teachers in particular.     

Reflections on 40 Years of the Journal of Business Logistics: From the Editors

This editorial embodies a series of essays from the current and past editors of the Journal of Business Logistics in marking the 40th anniversary of the journal. The compendium is intended to illustrate the evolution in logistics thought and practice as well as the journal's role in documenting and advancing the field. Key trends are identified in each era. Further, each editor expresses opinions of the current and future state of the discipline. This review reflects on the evolution of the Journal of Business Logistics and envisions the futures of the logistics field and supply chain discipline.     

Partnership Formation for Change: Indicators for Transformative Potential in Cross Sector Social Partnerships

Despite their ethical intentions, ethically minded consumers rarely purchase ethical products (Auger and Devinney: 2007, Journal of Business Ethics 76, 361–383). This intentions–behaviour gap is important to researchers and industry, yet poorly understood (Belk et al.: 2005, Consumption, Markets and Culture 8(3), 275–289). In order to push the understanding of ethical consumption forward, we draw on what is known about the intention–behaviour gap from the social psychology and consumer behaviour literatures and apply these insights to ethical consumerism. We bring together three separate insights – implementation intentions (Gollwitzer: 1999, American Psychologist 54(7), 493–503), actual behavioural control (ABC) (Ajzen and Madden: 1986, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 22, 453–474; Sheeran et al.: 2003, Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 393–410) and situational context (SC) (Belk: 1975, Journal of Consumer Research 2, 157–164) – to construct an integrated, holistic conceptual model of the intention–behaviour gap of ethically minded consumers. This holistic conceptual model addresses significant limitations within the ethical consumerism literature, and moves the understanding of ethical consumer behaviour forward. Further, the operationalisation of this model offers insight and strategic direction for marketing managers attempting to bridge the intention–behaviour gap of the ethically minded consumer.     

A Tribute to Our Founding Father,Professor Bernard J. “Bud” LaLonde

This editorial pays tribute to the founding editor of the Journal of Business Logistics, Professor Bernard J. “Bud” LaLonde, who passed away recently. Professor LaLonde's influence on the field—and the individuals that compose it—is immeasurable. We reflect on his career, achievements, and motivations for creating JBL. Further, we attempt to build on his proud legacy with an introduction of articles featured in the current issue.     

Personal values and business decisions: An exploratory investigation

Interest in subjective values and decision responses are investigated empirically, including statistically testing the predictive relationships between subjective values, other independent variables such as level and area of executive responsibility, and decision responses. John H. Barnett is Associate Professor at the Whittemore School of Business and Economics, University of New Hampshire, U.S.A. He was previously a Management Consultant (Cresap, McCormick & Paget) and a Volunteer Executive (Brazil, Mexico, Panama, Papua New guinea, Philippines). He is a Certified Public Accountant and a Doctor of Divinity. His most important publications are: A Business Model of Enlightenment, Journal of Business Ethics 4 (1985), Controversy and Change in Cultural concepts, (Sierra Madre Seminary), and Down the Rose Path: A Businessman's Search for Enlightenment, in press. Marvin J. Karson is Professor of Business Statistics and James R. Carter Professor of Management at the University of New Hampshire. He was formerly Professor of Statistics at the University of Alabama. His work has been published in a number of professional journals. One of his most recent publications is: Karson, M. J. and Cheng, D. C., Estimation of Multi-Period Expected Rates of Return When Investment Relatives are Lognormally Distributed, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 3, No. 2 (1985), 140–148. He is also the author of Multivariate Statistical Methods (Iowa State University Press, 1982).     

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.     

The corporate social responsiveness orientation of board members: Are there differences between inside and outside directors?

Differences and similarities between inside and outside board members with regard to their attitudes toward corporate social responsibility are examined. The results indicate that outside directors exhibit greater concern about the discretionary component of corporate responsibility and a weaker orientation toward economic performance. No significant differences between the two groups were observed with respect to the legal and ethical dimensions of corporate social responsibility. Some explanations as well as limited generalizations and implications are developed.Nabil Ibrahim is the Grover Maxwell Professor of Business Administration at Augusta College, Augusta, Georgia. He teaches courses in Strategic Management and Organizational Behavior. Dr. Ibrahim's articles have appeared in theJournal of Business Ethics, theJournal of Applied Business Research, andHealth Care Management Review as well as various other journals and proceedings.John Angelidis is Assistant Professor of Management at St. John's University, New York, NY. He teaches courses in Strategic Management and International Business. Dr. Angelidis has published articles in theMid-Atlantic Journal of Business, theJournal of Applied Business Research, andBusiness Review, as well as in various other journals and proceedings.     

Trust and Stakeholder Theory: Trustworthiness in the Organisation–Stakeholder Relationship

Trust is a fundamental aspect of the moral treatment of stakeholders within the organization–stakeholder relationship. Stakeholders trust the organization to return benefit or protections from harm commensurate with their contributions or stakes. However, in many situations, the firm holds greater power than the stakeholder and therefore cannot necessarily be trusted to return the aforementioned duty to the stakeholder. Stakeholders must therefore rely on the trustworthiness of the organization to fulfill obligations in accordance to Phillips’ principle of fairness (Business Ethics Quarterly 7(1), 1997, 51–66), particularly where low-power stakeholders may not be fully consenting (Van Buren III, Business Ethics Quarterly 11(3), 2001, 481–499). The construct of organizational trustworthiness developed herewith is presented as a possible solution to the problem of unfairness in organization–stakeholder relations. While organizational trustworthiness does not create an ethical obligation where none existed before, stakeholders who lack power will likely be treated fairly when organizational trustworthiness is present.