Evaluating Stakeholder Theory

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

A Critical Perspective of Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Recurring Criticisms and Next Generation Research Topics

During the past ten years Integrative Social Contracts Theory (ISCT) has become part of the repertoire of specialized decision-oriented theories in the business ethics literature. The intention here is to (1)␣provide a brief overview of the structure and strengths of ISCT; (2) identify recurring themes in the extensive commentary on the theory including brief mention of how ISCT has been applied outside the business ethics literature; (3) describe where research appears to be headed; and (4) specify challenges faced by those who seek to reform ISCT. Key themes in the critiquing literature relate to (a) the identification process for hypernorms; (b) justification of the recognition of hypernorms; (c) proposals for considering meso or meta norms; (d)␣clarification of the relationship between stakeholder concepts and ISCT; (e) problems with potentially unoccupied moral free space; (f) sources of ethical obligation within the ISCT framework; and (g) the potential role for concepts of stakeholder dialogue and engagement. Thomas Dunfee is the Kolodny Professor of Social Responsibility at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He is a former president of the Academy of Legal Studies in Business and the Society for Business Ethics. He is a former director of the Wharton Ethics Program and the Carol and Lawrence Zicklin Center for Business Ethics Research. Professor Dunfee has written widely on topics in business law and business ethics.     

Organizational performance with a broader focus: The case for a stakeholder approach to leadership

In 2019, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and the other 179 CEO members of the Business Roundtable argued that the purpose of a corporation must reflect not only the fiduciary interests of owners but also the varied interests of all stakeholders: employees, customers, partners, and broader society. This idea challenges a decades-old norm of shareholder primacy, so it is reasonable for organizational leaders to wonder whether doing so is truly in their firms’ best interests, and if so, how to implement this approach to leadership. To answer these questions, we draw on over 200 peer-reviewed articles covering leadership research to demonstrate how servant leadership, a stakeholder-focused approach to management, outperforms other leadership approaches across both shareholder and stakeholder criteria. We leverage case studies of organizational leaders from SAS, Zappos, Starbucks, and Jason’s Deli, financially successful organizations that exemplify how managers provide value and sustainability to stakeholders and shareholders through servant leadership. We also include practical steps managers can take to begin putting this form of leadership into practice.     

Some Thoughts on Moriarty and Moeller

Abstact In a recent paper in Business Ethics Quarterly Professor Jeffrey Moriarty (2005) asserted the relevance of political philosophy to business ethics. Moriarty asked whether “businesses ought to be run (more) like states” and argued why that might be beneficial. This paper on the contrary asserts that there are distinct disadvantages to businesses attempting to be run more like states. Specifically, it asserts that any such an attempt increases the likelihood of the re-emergence of a totalitarian society as businesses currently often act as an intermediary between the individual and the state. The paper contemplates Moeller’s ambitions in the Weimar period for the business to be run like a state and the historical outcome of those ambitions. The paper also distinguishes between two different kinds of rights and argues that different kinds of rights pertain to different sectors which preclude business being run like a state. Dr. Michael Schwartz is an associate professor at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. He also serves as the vice-president of the Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics. His research in the field of business ethics has been published in Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, the Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly and Business Ethics: A European Review.     

Enabling Guanxi Management in China: A Hierarchical Stakeholder Model of Effective Guanxi

Guanxi (literally interpersonal connections) is in essence a network of resource coalition-based stakeholders sharing resources for survival, and it plays a key role in achieving business success in China. However, the salience of guanxi stakeholders varies: not all guanxi relationships are necessary, and among the necessary guanxi participants, not all are equally important. A hierarchical stakeholder model of guanxi is developed drawing upon Mitchell et al.’s (1997) stakeholder salience theory and Anderson’s (1982) constituency theory. As an application of instrumental stakeholder theory, the model dimensionalizes the notion of stakeholder salience, and distinguishes between and among internal and external guanxi, core, major, and peripheral guanxi, and primary and secondary guanxi stakeholders. Guanxi management principles are developed based on a hierarchy of guanxi priorities and management specializations. The goal of this application of instrumental stakeholder theory is to construct, for Western business firms in China, a means to reliably identify guanxi partners by employing the principles of effective guanxi. These principles are described in the form of testable propositions that advance social scientific research in this area of international business ethics. Chenting Su is Associate Professor of Marketing at City University of Hong Kong. He is also Adjunct Professor at Wuhan University, P.R. China. He previously taught at the University of Victoria, Canada, He writes for Journal of Marketing Research, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Journal of Travel Research, Journal of Business Ethics, Psychology & Marketing, International Journal of Market Research, Service Marketing Quarterly, Research in Marketing, and others. He presently serves as Executive Director of China Marketing Association, P.R. China. Ronald K. Mitchell is Professor of Entrepreneurship and J. A. Bagley Regents Chair in Management in the Rawls College of Business at Texas Tech University. He publishes in the areas of new value creation and stakeholder theory. From 1999–2002 he held a joint appointment in strategy and public policy in the Guanghua School of Management at Peking University, Beijing, PRC. He has won numerous awards for research and program building; presently serves in the leadership of the AOM Entrepreneurship Division; and is Co-Editor for the Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice three-volume Special Issue on Entrepreneurial Cognition. Joe Sirgy is Professor of Marketing and Virginia Real Estate Research Fellow at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech). He has published extensively in the area of business ethics and quality-of-life (QOL) research in relation to theory, philosophy, measurement, business, and public policy. He co-founded the International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) in 1995 and is currently serving as its Executive Director. He received the Distinguished Fellow Award from both the Academy of Marketing Science and ISQOLS. In 2003, ISQOLS recognized him as the Distinguished QOL Researcher for research excellence and a record of lifetime achievement in QOL research. He also is the current JMM section editor on QOL issues and a co-editor of Applied Research in Quality of Life.     

“Integrity testing” for personnel selection: An unsparing perspective

Federal legislation (the Employee Polygraph Protection Act) adopted in 1988 prohibits virtually all private sector employers from requiring or requesting preemployment polygraph examinations for prospective employees. Since then, written integrity testing designed to reliably distinguish those prospective employees who may steal from the company from those who are far less likely to do so has been something of a growth industry. Indeed, the American Psychological Association has recently noted that honesty tests have demonstrated useful levels of validity as an employee selection measure. We provide an alternative perspective. We argue that, even under the most charitable of assumptions, the propensity of integrity tests to generate false positives (i.e., to identify prospective employees as potential thieves when, in fact, they are not) is unsuitably large. Thus, the integrity test as currently configured is largely without merit as a personnel selection device.Dan R. Dalton is the Dow Professor of Management and Director of Graduate Programs, Graduate School of Business, Indiana University. Formerly with General Telephone & Electronics (GT&E) for thirteen years. Widely published in business and psychology, his articles have appeared in theAcademy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Executive, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Journal of Law and Public Policy, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Business Strategy, Behavioral Science, andHuman Relations, as well as many others.Michael B. Metzger is currently Professor of Business Law, Indiana University Graduate School of Business. Formerly Associate Dean for Academics and chair of the Business Law Department at I.U. He received his J.D. in 1969. Before entering academia he held a variety of positions, including Deputy Securities Commissioner, State of Indiana and Senior Legislative Analyst, Indiana Legislative Council. He also was in private practice in Indianapolis, Indiana with the firm of Baratz, Sosin, Jodka and Metzger. Widely published in legal and business and ethics journals, his work has appeared in theGeorgetown Law Journal theVanderbilt Law Review, theMinnesota Law Review, theEcology Law Quarterly, theBusiness Ethics Quarterly, and theSouthwestern Law Journal, as well as numerous others. Three times he has received theAmerican Business Law Journal's award for the best article of the year. He is a coauthor ofBusiness Law and the Regulatory Environment: Concepts and Cases (8th ed.), and is the winner of 12 awards for teaching at both undergraduate and graduate levels. He regularly addresses public and industry groups on business ethics issues.     

The Relevance and Value of Confucianism in Contemporary Business Ethics

This article examines the relevance and value of Confucian Ethics to contemporary Business Ethics by comparing their respective perspectives and approaches towards business activities within the modern capitalist framework, the principle of reciprocity and the concept of human virtues. Confucian Ethics provides interesting parallels with contemporary Western-oriented Business Ethics. At the same, it diverges from contemporary Business Ethics in some significant ways. Upon an examination of philosophical texts as well as empirical studies, it is argued that Confucian Ethics is able to provide some unique philosophical and intellectual perspectives in order to forge a richer understanding and analysis of the field of contemporary Business Ethics. Gary Kok Yew Chan is Assistant Professor of Law at Singapore Management University. Apart from Business Law, he teaches Ethics and Social Responsibility. He has obtained an LL.B (National University of Singapore) and LL.M (School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London) respectively and has published in several reputable law journals including Journal of Business Law, Cambridge Law Journal, Australian Journal of Asian Law, Hong Kong Law Journal and Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. In addition, he holds an M.A. in Southeast Asian Studies (National University of Singapore) and a B.A. in Philosophy (University of London).     

An Empirical Investigation of the Ethical Perceptions of Future Managers with a Special Emphasis on Gender – Turkish Case

This study presents an empirical investigation of the ethical perceptions of the future managers – Turkish university students majoring in the Business Administration and Industrial Engineering departments of selected public and private Turkish universities – with a special emphasis on gender. The perceptions of the university students pertaining to the business world, the behaviors of employees, and the factors leading to unethical behavior are analyzed. The statistically significant differences reveal that female students have more ethical perceptions about the Turkish business climate, behavior of employees, and the ethicalness of the behavior of the employees in comparison with their male counterparts. M.G. Serap Atakan is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Business Administration of Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey. She is teaching and conducting researches on business ethics, corporate social responsibility and retailing. She has two co-authored articles published in the Journal of Business Ethics. Sebnem Burnaz is an Associate Professor of Marketing at Istanbul Technical University. She holds Ph.D. degree in management with major in marketing. Her teaching and research interests are in the field of Marketing, Retailing, Decision Making, and Business Ethics. She has published articles which have appeared in Advances in International Marketing, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. Y. Ilker Topcu is an Associate Professor of decision sciences in Istanbul Technical University. He has finished his Ph.D. studies in I.T.U., Faculty of Management. His teaching and research specialties are in the field of Operations Research/Management Science, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Logistics, Transportation Planning, and Business Ethics. He has published papers which have appeared in Journal of the Operational Research Society, European Journal of Operational Research, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Journal of Global Optimization, Transportation Research Part A, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Energy, and Building and Environment.     

Serving the homeless and low-income communities through Business & Society/Business Ethics class projects: The University of Wisconsin-Madison plan

For several years, MBA students enrolled in a Business & Society/Business Ethics class at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have been volunteering their services at homeless shelters and in low-income communities. Students also work with low-income residents and relevant stakeholders on evolutionary team projects aimed at improving living conditions in low-income communities. These projects include starting a grocery co-op, credit union, day-care center, job training center and a transportation business. In addition, student groups develop service networks that link low-income communities with student organizations, other university professors and United Way volunteers. This article provides an evolutionary summary of these projects with the hope that other professors will adopt them for their classes. Denis Collins is an Assistant Professor of Business Ethics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has published numerous articles in the areas of business ethics, business and society, social philosophy, participatory management and gainsharing. He is coauthor, with Thomas O'Rourke, of Ethical Dilemmas in Business (South-Western Publishing, 1994) and coeditor, with Mark Starik, of Sustaining the Natural Environment: Empirical Studies on the Interface Between Nature and Organizations (JAI Press, 1995).     

The Effectiveness of Business Codes: A Critical Examination of Existing Studies and the Development of an Integrated Research Model

Business codes are a widely used management instrument. Research into the effectiveness of business codes has, however, produced conflicting results. The main reasons for the divergent findings are: varying definitions of key terms; deficiencies in the empirical data and methodologies used; and a lack of theory. In this paper, we propose an integrated research model and suggest directions for future research. Muel Kaptein is Professor of Business Ethics and Integrity Management at the Department of Business-Society Management at RSM Erasmus University. His research interests include the management of ethics, the measurement of ethics and the ethics of management. He has published papers in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Society, Organization Studies, Academy of Management Review, Business & Society Review, Corporate Governance, Policing, Public Integrity, and European Management Journal. He is the author of the books Ethics Management (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998),The Balanced Company (Oxford University Press, 2002), and The Six Principles of Managing with Integrity (Spiro Press, 2005). Muel is also director at KPMG Integrity, where he assisted more than 40 companies in developing their business code. Mark S. Schwartz is Assistant Professor of Goverance, Law and Ethics at the Atkinson School of Administrative Studies at York University (Toronto). His research interests include corporate ethics programs, ethical leadership, and corporate social responsibility. He has published papers in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Society, Business Ethics Quarterly, Professional Ethics, and the Journal of Management History, and is a co-author of the textbook Business Ethics: Readings and Cases in Corporate Morality (McGraw Hill). He is also a Research Fellow of the Center of Business Ethics (Bentley College) and the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem (Jerusalem College of Technology).     

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.     

Organization of work in the company and family rights of the employees

The duty to respect, protect and help the family rights is related very closely with the organization of work in the firm. This paper summarizes and illustrates, using mini-case studies, the relationship between the organization of work in companies and the family rights and duties of employees.Domènec Melé is the Director of Business Ethics Dept. at IESE (the Business School of the University of Navarra in Barcelona, Spain). He has a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering from Polytechnic University of Catalonia, Spain and a Ph.D. in Moral Theology from the University of Navarra, Spain.Before, he has been professor at the Polytechinc University in Valencia, Spain. His published works consist of several articles on engineering topics and more recently on Business Ethics and Social Teaching of the Church on economics and business.     

The course in business ethics: Can it work?

An examination of ninety-nine syllabi for undergraduate courses in business ethics, collected by the Center for Business Ethics at Bentley College, reveals that half the courses are offered to freshmen and sophomores. Because of the fact that these students will have minimal knowledge of the functional areas of business firms, and because these courses rely heavily on case analysis, it is likely that the students in these courses are not able to deal effectively with the material in the course. Therefore, any expectation that the business ethics course will raise the students' ethical sensitivity when considering business problems or decisions is unrealistic.Dr. Pamental teaches Business, Government and Society and Business Ethics in Literature at Rhode Island College, and is a Research Fellow of the Center for Business Ethics at Bentley College. He has written extensively on the subject of business ethics and its relationship to business programs.     

The Business Ethics of Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata – A Forerunner in Promoting Stakeholder Welfare

This article examines the business practices of Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, the founder the Tata group of business in India in the 19th century, from the perspective of stakeholder welfare. Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata was concerned about the welfare of all major stakeholder constituents. His business practices promoted the welfare of employees, customers, society, owners, competitors, environment and other stakeholders. He implemented several measures even before law mandated them thus acting as a forerunner in promoting stakeholder welfare. His business plans became the foundation for an economically strong India. This article, after an initial overview of the stakeholder framework, describes the business practices of Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata with regard to major stakeholder constituents. Relevant research findings regarding each stakeholder constituent studied have been cited to show that the practices of Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata have relevance to business even today. The author humbly dedicates the article to Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, the Revered Chancellor of Sri Sathya Sai University, Prasanthinilayam, India.     

What is the American business value system?

The model of free enterprise that has developed in the United States presupposes a value system. The central value is freedom. Next come goods and the means of acquiring them, viz., money and profit. Competition is central. But fairness of transactions is presupposed, and this implies honesty, truthfulness, and general respect for persons. Optimism and faith in the future have been ingredients from the start. Each of these values can be abused, and such abuses characterize the seamy side of capitalism. The Myth of Amoral Business helps undermine the values. Yet the changes American society is demanding of business can be seen as reaffirming the values the system presupposes. The imperative is for business to live up to its own best traditions — a social demand that business can and should meet if it wishes to continue as a system of free enterprise. Richard T. De George is University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Center for Humanistic Studies at the University of Kansas. He is author or editor of thirteen books, including Ethics and Society; Ethics, Free Enterprise and Public Policy; and Business Ethics.     

Ethical Theory and Business Practices: The Case of Discourse Ethics

By focusing on the reasoned debate in the discourse-ethical approach to business ethics, this paper discusses the possibilities and limitations of moral reasoning as well as applied economic and business ethics. Business ethics, it is contended, can be looked at from the standpoint of two criteria: justification and application. These criteria are used to compare three approaches: the Integrative Business Ethics, developed by Swiss philosopher Peter Ulrich, the Cultural Business Ethics of the Nuremberg School in German business ethics, and the concept of “Good Conservation” by Frederick Bird. It is argued that discourse-ethical approaches can be called upon for justifying moral principles. Improving the chances of their application, however, necessitates a good understanding of lifeworlds and culturally developed institutional settings. Bearing this in mind, further research perspectives stressing a linkage between discourse-ethical and critical approaches in social sciences are suggested.Dr. Thomas Beschorner is head of the research group “Social Learning and Sustainability” at University of Oldenburg, Germany and currently Visiting-Professor at McGill University, Montreal, Canada     

Business Strategy and Poverty Alleviation

Currently, entrepreneurs and corporations overwhelmingly do not view the alleviation of global poverty as a strategic priority. Yet business activity can have a negative as well as a positive effect on each distinctive form of poverty. In order to reduce poverty, entrepreneurs have to find ways of limiting the negative aspects. This might be achieved by deliberately augmenting strategies so that they can achieve a synthesis, in partnership with governments and NGO’s. Alan E. Singer is a reader in strategy at the university of Canterbury. He was the 2004/5 Aram chair of Business Ethics at Gonzaga. He is author of Strategy as Rationality (Avebury), Co editor (with Pat Werhane) of Business Ethics in Theory and Practice (Kluwer) and editor of Business Ethics and Strategy (Ashgate, forthcoming). He has written journal articles on many aspects of strategy and decision making and has served on the editorial boards of Journal of Business Ethics (to 2003), Human Systems Management, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, African Journal of Business Ethics and the Journal of Economic Development and Business Policy.     

Danger signs of unethical behavior: How to determine if your firm is at ethical risk

This paper is designed to do three things. First, it discusses some of the key trends in business ethics in the academic and corporate communities. Initiatives like the Arthur Andersen Business Ethics Program are noted. Secondly, the paper examines certain basic misconceptions about the field and concludes that the adage that good ethics is good business is still true. Finally, the paper highlights fourteen business attitudes or practices that may put a firm at ethical risk. For example, the paper discusses the risk of using ethics as simply a public relations initiative.Man's life is not a state of unalloyed happiness. The earth is no paradise. Although this is not the fault of social institutions, people are wont to hold them responsible for it. The foundation of any and every civilization, including our own, is private ownership of the means of production. Whoever wishes to criticize modern civilization, therefore, begins with private property. It is blamed for everything that does not please the critic, especially those evils that have their origin in the fact that private property has been hampered and restrained in various respects so that its full social potentialities cannot be realized.¹ Ludwig von Mises Robert Allan Cooke is Director of the Institute for Business Ethics at DePaul University. He has served as a member of the executive board of the Corporate Responsibility Group of Chicago, the educational subcommittee of Chicago United, and as an academic advisor for the Heartland Institute. He serves as project liason on the advisory council of the Arthur Andersen Business Ethics Program. He is also a management consultant in corporate training who frequently lectures to business and civic groups. His most recent publication is: The Ethical Side of Takeovers and Mergers, with Earl Young, Essentials of Business Ethics (New American Library, 1990).     

Crucial issues in successful European business

Time has come to put business ethics explicitly on the agenda of those who bear responsibility in the business world and of the scholars working in the field of business administration sciences. Reflection should bear on specific issues of concern, but also on processes of decision in business practices and on patterns of thought at work inside issues and processes. What the issues are, which processes and patterns need scrutiny, is to be decided upon in the course of the public normative debate in which ethicists, as experts of conceptual analysis and argumentation, and corporate executives as experts in decision-making each take an equal and fair share, as people who are able and willing to proffer an argued personal standpoint in an open debate.Henk J. L. van Luijk is Professor of Ethics at Nijenrode, The Netherlands School of Business, Breukelen, The Netherlands, and at the University of Groningen, The Netherlands. He is chairman of the Executive Committee of EBEN, The European Business Ethics Network. His special field is business ethics. He is the author of three books on various philosophical subjects. In his special field he published several articles, mainly in Dutch philosophical and professional journals.