Ethics and the organizational person: Revisiting DeGeorge

In this paper I review the dispute over DeGeorge's analysis of the issue of the ethical responsibilities of engineers in large organizations. I argue that this issue is no different than the question of the ethical responsibilities of any other relevantly situated employee because engineers have no special duty to hold paramount the safety of the public distinct from that of others. I demonstrate how critics like Mankin, James, and Curd and May have misread and misinterpreted DeGeorge's position and his argument. I then identify a serious logical problem in DeGeorge, unnoticed by critics, but conclude by defending the spirit of DeGeorge's approach. That spirit recognizes the limitations of attempting to provide necessary and sufficient conditions in response to many questions in applied philosophy. John R. Danley is Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophical Studies at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. His Liberalism, Aboriginal Rights and Cultural Minorities, has recently appeared in Philosophy & Public Affairs (1991). Polestar Refined: Business Ethics and Political Economy has recently appeared in Journal of Business Ethics (1991). Other articles have appeared in the following journals: Mind, Philosophical Studies, The Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, Business and Professional Ethics, Journal of Negro Education, and Journal of Business Ethics. Articles have also appeared in Action Theory and The Ethics of Organizational Transformation, and elsewhere.     

Ethics in business education: Working toward a meaningful reciprocity

This paper outlines and argues against some criticisms of business ethics education. It maintains that these criticisms have been put forward due to a misunderstanding of the nature of business and/or ethics. Business ethics seeks a meaningful reciprocity among economic, social and moral concerns. This demands that business organizations autonomously develop ethical goals from within, which in turn demands a reciprocity between ethical theory and practical experience. Working toward such a reciprocity, the ultimate goal of business ethics education is a moral business point of view through which one can live with integrity and fulfillment.To everyone who proposes to have a good career, moral philosophy is indispensible. Cicero, De Officiis, 44BC W. Michael Hoffman is Chair and Professor in the Department of Philosophy and Director at the Center for Business Ethics, Bentley College, Waltham, MA. He has received the following Grants: Council for Philosophical Studies, NEH Fellow, NDEA Fellow, Matchette. His most important publications are: Kant's Theory of Freedom: A Metaphysical Inquiry (UPA, 1979); Proceedings of the National Conferences on Business Ethics, 5 volumes (1977–1984); Business Ethics (McGraw-Hill, 1984) and articles in Journal of Business Ethics, Idealistic Studies, International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Journal of Thought, The Journal for Critical Analysis, and The Southern Journal of Philosophy.Paper presented at the 16th Conference on Value Inquiry, entitled: Ethics and the Market Place: An Exercise in Bridge-Building or On the Slopes of the Interface.     

Thoughts on ‘management-think’

In this paper I briefly summarize Pastin's views on the problem of good business thinking (GBT) and the solution (Perspectival Analysis) which he offers. In discussing Pastin's solution I offer a number criticisms which call for further elucidation on Pastin's part. Specifically, I challenge his vagueness on which perspectives a manager must consider, the manner in which the moral components of these perspectives are to be evaluated, and whether Pastin is not in the end committed simply to an economic account of GBT. Finally, I contend that Pastin's account of GBT errors in being too intellectualistic and too individualistic. George G. Brenkert is Associate Professor at the University of Tennessee. His most important publications are Privacy, Polygraphs, and Work in Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1, No. 1 1981; Strict Products Liability and Compensatory Justice, in Business Ethics: Readings and Cases in Corporate Morality, edited by W. Michael Hoffman and Jennifer Mills Moore (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984); and Marx's Ethics of Freedom (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983).     

Friedman fallacies

Milton Friedman's article, The Social Responsibility of Business Is To Increase Its Profits, owes its appeal to the rhetorical devices of simplicity, authority, and finality. More careful consideration reveals oversimplification and ambiguity that conceals empirical errors and logical fallacies. It is false that business does, or would, operate exclusively in economic terms, that managers concentrate obsessively on profitability, and that ethics can be marginalized. These errors reflect basic contradictions: an apolitical political base, altruistic agents of selfishness, and good deriving from greed. Colin Grant is a Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Mount Allison University. He teaches an undergraduate course on The Ethics and Ethos of Business. His article Giving Ethics the Business appeared in JBE 7 (1988), pp. 489–495. Some of the journals in which he has published are: The Christian Century, The Dalhousie Review, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Modern Theology, Religious Studies, Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses, The Toronto Journal of Theology.     

A reply to Thomas Mulligan's “critique of Milton Friedman's essay ‘The Social Responsibility of Business to Increase Its Profits’”

Professor Thomas Mulligan undertakes to discredit Milton Friedman's thesis that The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. He attempts to do this by moving from Friedman's paradigm characterizing a socially responsible executive as willful and disloyal to a different paradigm, i.e., one emphasizing the consultative and consensus-building role of a socially responsible executive. Mulligan's critique misses the point, first, because even consensus-building executives act contrary to the will of minority shareholders, but even more importantly, because he assumes that the mandate of a shareholder majority brings legitimacy to efforts of corporate managers to utilize corporate wealth in solving social problems. It is the role of our democratic institutions to deal with national agenda issues such as inflation, unemployment, and pollution, not that of the private sector. Corporations and private individuals do have a role to play in enhancing the quality of the human environment, however, and the author suggests a coherent means of developing that role in an effort rescue corporate social responsibility from Mulligan no less than from Friedman. Bill Shaw, Lynette S. Autrey Visiting Professor of Business Ethics at the Jesse H. School of Administration, Rice University, is Professor of Business Law at the University of Texas at Austin. He is staff editor of the American Business Law Journal and the Midwest Law Review. Among his most recent publications are The Structure of the Legal Environment (with Art Wolfe), Environmental Law: Text and Cases, The Global Environment: A Proposal to Eliminate Marine Oil Pollution (With Frank Cross and Brenda Winslett, The Natural Resources Journal), and Comparable Worth and Its Prospects (The Labor Law Journal).     

The “Modified Vendetta Sanction” as a method of corporate-collective punishment

Shannon Shipp argues for the Modified Vendetta Sanction as a method of corporate-collective punishment. He claims that this sanction evades the difficulties of Peter French's Hester Prynne Sanction. In this paper I argue that, though the Modified Vendetta Sanction evades the problems that Shipp poses for it, it fails to evade some of the difficulties that I pose for French's method. Moreover, there are some difficulties that plague the Modified Vendetta Sanction which do not count against the Hester Prynne Sanction. Therefore, if my analysis holds, then Shipp's method neither improves significantly on the Hester Prynne Sanction nor is unproblematic in its own right. The significance of this paper is that it foils yet another attempt by some corporate punishment theorists to establish the plausibility of a method of corporate-collective punishment. J. Angelo Corlett has authored papers on ethics, social/political philosophy, history of philosophy, value theory, epistemology and metaphysics. His papers appear in such journals as the Public Affairs Quarterly, the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Professional Ethics Journal, the American Psychologist, Idealistic Studies, the American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine. He is the editor of and contributor to two forthcoming books: Equality and Liberty: Analyzing Rawls and Nozick and Analyzing Marx: The Moral Assessment of Capitalist Exploitation.     

“Ought” implies “can”, or,the moral relevance of a theory of the firm

Since ought implies can, i.e., one cannot be obligated to do what one cannot do, the question of corporate responsibility cannot be discussed intelligibly without an inquiry into the range of corporate or managerial discretion. Hence, the moral relevance of a theory of the firm. Within classical or neo-classical economic theory, for instance, firms which act other than to maximize profit are eliminated. They cannot do otherwise, and thus either have no obligations at all or only the duty to maximize profit. The thesis of the Managerial Revolution, if true, establishes only that management is free from direct stockholder control. By asserting that corporations have responsibilities to do other than maximize profit, philosophers assume a wide degree of managerial discretion, without considering recent developments in the theory of the firm which suggest that new incentives and constraints radically restrict managerial liberty in a capitalist society. John R. Danley is Associate Professor at the Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. He is the author of three articles: The Fundamental Assumption of Hypothetical Process Arguments, Philosophical Studies 34 (1978); Robert Nozick and the Libertarian Paradox, Mind 88 (1979); and Toward a Theory of Bribery, Business and Professional Ethics Journal 3.     

Cultural and socioeconomic constraints on international codes of ethics: Lessons from accounting

This paper provides a framework for the examination of cultural and socioeconomic factors that could impede the acceptance and implementation of a profession's international code of conduct. We apply it to the Guidelines on Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by the International Federation of Accountants (1990). To examine the cultural effects, we use Hofstede's (1980a) four work-related values: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. The socioeconomic factors are the level of development of the profession and the availability of economic resources. We evaluate the applicability and relevance of the accounting guideline, and discuss the implications for accounting and other professions.Jeffrey R. Cohen is Assistant Professor of Accounting at Boston College. He is a CMA and a KPMG Peat Marwick Faculty Fellow. His articles have appeared in theJournal of Accounting Research, Decision Sciences, The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting. His work on ethics has appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting andThe CPA Journal.Laurie W. Pant is Associate Professor of Accounting at Suffolk University. She holds an MBA and DBA and an M.Ed. She is a CMA and serves on the editorial board ofIssues in Accounting Education. Her articles have appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting, The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting.David J. Sharp is Assistant Professor of Accounting at the University of Western Ontario. He received his Ph.D. and M.Sc. He is an ACMA and serves on the editorial board ofJournal of International Accounting Auditing and Taxation. His articles have appeared in theMidland Corporate Finance Journal, Sloan Management Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting.     

The indefensibility of insider trading

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

Current research in moral development as a decision support system

This paper argues that human beings possess the rational capabilities necessary to achieve the goal of more just and peaceable social orders, but that our educational institutions are failing in their responsibility to do what in fact can be done to produce graduates who make decisions in ways most likely to achieve this goal.Data compiled by us, consistent with other research, indicates that only a small percentage of the individuals graduating from universities and professional schools have developed the capacity for post-conventional moral reasoning. William Y. Penn, Jr. is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at St. Edward's University, Austin, TX. He held a chair at the Department of Religion of the Archbishop Hoban High School. His most important publication is: Kohlberg and Business Ethics, Edwin Mellon Press. A Collection of essays on business ethics is forthcoming. Boyd D. Collier is Professor and Head of the Department of Accounting and Finance at the Tarleton State University. Formerly he was Senior Lecturer at the University of Texas at Austin and Dean at the Center of Business Administration at St. Edward's University. His most important publications are: The Valuation of External Diseconomies of Pollution, The Journal of Environmental Planning and Pollution Control, 1973, Accounting for Convertible Bonds Impact on Earnings Per Share, Management Accounting 1979, and Measurement and Environmental Deterioration, University of Texas Bureau of Business Research Monograph No. 34.     

Bribery,consent and prima facie duty: A rejoinder to Carson

Responding to my paper Bribery Tom Carson argues that bribe takers violate promisory obligations in a wider range of cases than I acknowledge and insists that bribe taking is prima facie wrong in all contexts. I argue that he is wrong on both counts. Michael Philips is a Professor of Philosophy at Portland State University. Recent papers by him have appeared in the Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Ethics, Philosophical Studies, Nous, Law and Philosophy, The Journal of Business Ethics, and several other journals. He is currently at work an a book in moral theory.     

TNCs and the corruption of GATT: Free trade versus fair trade

In order to enrich global corporate culture, a distinction must be made between the economic ideology of free trade and the moral ideology of fair trade. GATT has failed to make this distinction. Its sole ethos of free trade is only applicable among developmentally equivalent nations, and has been used by TNCs as a means for attaining their commercial ends in the third world. GATT's lack of commitment to an objective of fair trade necessitates its replacement. This article suggests a replacement in the form of a network of trade organizations. The network takes the form of a hub-and-spoke arrangement, in which the hub would be the Global Trade Organization, and the spokes would each represent Regional Trade Organizations.John Dobson is currently an Associate Professor of Finance at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. His primary research interests are Agency Theory and Financial Ethics. His publications include articles and letters inJournal of Business Ethics, Financial Management, Business in the Contemporary World andBusiness and Society.     

A validation and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale

Reidenbach and Robin (1988, 1990) proposed and refined a multidimensional ethics scale. This study replicates and extends their work by examining the generalizability of the scale beyond marketing to accounting, and to subjects from across the United States and other countries. Results indicate that, in general, the scale holds for this different sample and context. However, an additional utilitarian construct emerged in the current study as important for accounting academics in their ethical decision-making. We also found that when we refined Reidenbach and Robin's measure of intention to make a particular choice, a social desirability bias or halo effect was identified. Methodological implications for business ethics research are also presented.Jeffrey R. Cohen is Associate Professor of Accounting at Boston College. He is a C.M.A. and a KPMG Peat Marwick Faculty Fellow. His articles have appeared in theJournal of Accounting Research, Decision Sciences andThe Organizational Behavior Teaching Review. His work on Ethics has appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting, andThe CPA Journal.Laurie W. Pant is Associate Professor of Accounting at Suffolk University. She holds an M.B.A. and a D.B.A. and an M.Ed. She serves on the editorial board ofIssues in Accounting Education. Her articles on Ethics have appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting andThe Organizational Behavior Teaching Review.David Sharp is Assistant Professor of Accounting at University of Western Ontario. He holds a Ph.D. and an M.Sc. He serves on the editorial board of theJournal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation. His articles have appeared inThe Midland Corporate Finance Journal andSloan Management Review.     

HR's view of ethics in the work place: Are the barbarians at the gate?

Based on responses from 1078 human resource (HR) professionals, this study concludes that there is not an ethical crisis in the work place. Seven of 37 situations were rated as serious problems by more than 25% of the respondents. HR reported that their organizations are serious about uncovering and disciplining ethical misconduct, top management has a commitment to ethical business conduct, personal principles are not compromised to conform to company expectations, and performance pressures do not lead to unethical conduct. John Danley is Professor of Philosophy at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. His area of research is political philosophy and applied ethics. His publications include journals such as Philosophy and Public Affairs, Philosophical Studies, Mind, Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, and the Journal of Business Ethics. He has authored a book entitled The Role of the Modern Corporation in a Free Society (Notre Dame Press, 1994). Edward J. Harrick is Professor of Management and Director of Labor and Management Programs at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. His research interests concern organizational effectiveness, employee satisfaction, and human resource issues. His work has appeared in journals such as Personnel Administrator, Personnel, Training and Development Journal, Public Personnel Management, National Productivity Review and Consulting Psychology Journal. Diane Schaefer is Assistant Director of Labor and Management Programs at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. She has been involved in several large-scale survey research projects and employment selection validation studies. She was recently published in Consulting Psychology Journal. Donald Strickland is Professor of Management and Chair of the Department of Management at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. He recently published a work on the responses of accounting administrators to situations related to fund raising in higher education. His research has appeared in journals such as Issues in Accounting Education, Journal of Drug Issues, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, and American Sociological Review. George Sullivan is Associate Professor of Management at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. He teaches business law and business and society. His research has focused on such topics as employment discrimination, drugs in the workplace, race harassment, sex harassment, and pregnancy discrimination. His work has appeared in Labor Law Journal, Business and Society, Business Insights, Industrial Management, and the Journal of the College and University Personnel Association.     

Consumer ethics: The possible effects of terrorism and civil unrest on the ethical values of consumers

Research investigating the consumer's ethical beliefs, ideologies and orientation has been limited. Additionally, despite the repeated call in the literature for cross cultural research, virtually no studies have examined the ethical beliefs and ideologies of consumers from cultures other than those in North America. This study partially fills this gap in the literature by investigating the ethical beliefs, preferred ethical ideology, and degree of Machiavellianism of consumers from Egypt and Lebanon. The results indicate that consumers in Lebanon, which has been torn by civil unrest and terrorism, tend to be more Machiavellian, less idealistic, and more relativistic than their Egyptian counterparts. Additionally, the Lebanese consumers tend to be more accepting of questionable consumer practices.Mohammed Y. A. Rawwas is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa. His research has appeared in theJournal of Business Ethics, Journal of Hospital Marketing, Health Marketing Quarterly, Medical Marketing & Media, and national proceedings of the American Marketing Association.Scott J. Vitell is Associate Professor of Marketing and holder of the Michael S. Starnes Lecturship in Marketing and Business Ethics at the University of Mississippi. His work has previously appeared in theJournal of Macromarketing, theJournal of Business Ethics, Research in Marketing, theBusiness and Professional Ethics Journal and theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science as well as various other journals and proceedings.Jamal Al-Khatib is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. His research has appeared in theJournal of Consumer Marketing, International Marketing Review andResearch in the International Business Disciplines as well as various national and regional proceedings.     

Business ethics and doing what one ought to do

There are situations in human life where the failure to perform a certain act can be morally blameworthy and at the same time not constitute the failure of moral duty or obligation. While traditional approaches to ethics have not acknowledged the possibility of these acts, recent contributions to the literature have made a strong and convincing case for their existence. Here I explain the nature of these acts, present some examples of these acts as they might arise in one's business or professional life, and point out the importance of recognizing and performing these acts for those who wish to practice good ethics in their business or professional lives.Gregory Mellema is Professor of Philosophy at Calvin College. He has writtenIndividuals, Groups, and Shared Moral Responsibility andBeyond the Call of Duty and has published articles inAmerican Philosophical Quarterly, Philosophical Studies, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Philosophia, Analysis, andJournal of Value Inquiry. In recent years he has taught courses and spoken widely on topics in Business Ethics.     

Moral fictions and scientific management

This paper examines Alasdair MacIntyre's argument in After Virtue that corporate managers do not have the rational expertise in social control which they have used to justify their position in modern society. In particular, it is claimed that managerial science by taking an emotivist view, putting ends and values beyond the reach of sound rational judgment, has made human relationships matters of manipulation and undermined its own moral legitimacy. The question is advanced as to whether managers must operate from emotivist premises or whether they can truly understand and thus truly manage human affairs by rational reflection about human purpose, value, and intention. Paul C. Santilli is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Siena College, Loudonville, N.Y. His previous publication is: The Informative and Persuasive Functions of Advertising: A Moral Appraisal, Journal of Business Ethics 2 (1983), 27–33.Paper presented at the 16th Conference on Value Inquiry, entitled: Ethics and the Market Place: An Exercise in Bridge-Building or On the Slopes of the Interface.     

Principled moral reasoning: Is it a viable approach to promote ethical integrity?

In response to recent recommendations for the teaching of principled moral reasoning in business school curricula, this paper assesses the viability of such an approach. The results indicate that, while business students' level of moral reasoning in this sample are like most 18- to 21-year-olds, they may be incapable of grasping the concepts embodied in principled moral reasoning. Implications of these findings are discussed. James Weber is currently an Assistant Professor of Management at Marquette University. He has published articles on managerial values and moral reasoning and the teaching of business ethics in Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy: Empirical Studies of Business Ethics and Values, International Journal of Value Based Management, Human Relations, and Journal of Business Ethics. Sharon Green is currently an Assistant Professor of Accounting at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her research emphasizes information processing aspects of decision making in governmental, auditing and educational contexts. Her publications have appeared in Accounting Review and Research in Governmental and Non-Profit Accounting.     

Business and games

This paper responds to the popular argument that business is like a game and is thus insulated from the demands of morality. In the first half of the paper, I offer objections to this argument as it is put forward by John Ladd in his well-known article, Morality and the Ideal of Rationality in Formal Organizations. I argue that Ladd's analysis is flawed both because it deprives us of the ability to assert that a business is acting badly or that its goals are irrational, and because it is internally inconsistent. In the second half of the paper, I give reasons for thinking that business is not like a game.Peter Heckman teaches business ethics at Santa Clara University. His publications on Nietzsche can be found inThe British Journal of Aesthetics andPhilosophy and Rhetoric.     

Profit: Some moral reflections

The issues of profit, its moral meaning, justification and role, need careful examination. Mistakes to be avoided in making moral sense of profit include the assumption that profitability establishes a company's moral rectitude. Profit is too complex a phenomenon to establish any such thing. Steps toward clarifying these issues include distinguishing profit as the goal of the corporation from the larger goals of the economy itself, and clarifying what we mean by profit. Profit often includes the moral or value consideration of having been rightly or fairly earned. This provides one starting point internal to business for formulating standards for business ethics. Paul F. Camenisch (B.A., Centre College of Kentucky; B.D., Yale University Divinity School; Ph.D., Religion, Princeton University) is professor of Religious Studies, DePaul University, Chicago. His writing and research currently focus in applied areas such as business, medical and professional ethics. His articles have appeared in such journals as Hastings Center Report, Journal of Religious Ethics, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, Soundings, Listening, and Linacre Quarterly. His book, Grounding Professional Ethics in a Pluralistic Society, was published by Haven Publications in 1983.