Ethical beliefs and personal values of top level executives

Do business executives sell their souls to the corporation? Is the organization a “paramour” in an executive's life? Is backstabbing the only way to climb the corporate ladder? The basic purpose of this study was to provide answers to these questions by surveying Fortune 500 corporate executives in the marketing, finance, and production areas. The findings are interesting as various executives exhibited different behavior regarding three types of ethical concern.     

Is It Ethical to Use Ethics as Strategy?

Increasingly research in the field of business and society suggests that ethics and corporate social responsibility can be profitable. Yet this work raises a troubling question: Is it ethical to use ethics and social responsibility in a strategic way? Is it possible to be ethical or socially responsible for the wrong reason? In this article, we define a strategy concept in order to situate the different approaches to the strategic use of ethics and social responsibility found in the current literature. We then analyze the ethics of such approaches using both utilitarianism and deontology and end by defining limits to the strategic use of ethics.     

Risk Management,Real Options,Corporate Social Responsibility

The relationship of corporate social responsibility to risk management has been treated sporadically in the business society literature. Using real options theory, I develop the notion of corporate social responsibility as a real option its implications for risk management. Real options theory allows for a strategic view of corporate social responsibility. Specifically, real options theory suggests that corporate social responsibility should be negatively related to the firm’s ex ante downside business risk.     

Responsibility and Informal CSR in Formal Cameroonian SMEs

In this article, we explore the implicit conceptions of business ethics and social responsibility of owners?managers of small and medium enterprises (SME) in Cameroon. While using a hermeneutical approach, our main objective is to clarify how Sub-Saharan African business people themselves understand and define corporate responsibility in their particular economic and political environment. Our aim is not to deliver an empirical study of business practices and management behavior in SMEs. We wish to discuss which responsibilities they themselves judge to be relevant and which can legitimately be attributed to them by third parties. Secondly, we relate our findings to other empirical work on SMEs, in Africa and elsewhere. It is shown that there are similarities with the way in which SMEs in Europe interpret their responsibility, but also striking differences. Further, we relate our findings to some theoretical controversies around corporate social responsibility (CSR) in SMEs, to questions about evaluation tools for CSR in the SME context, and to the role of CSR with respect to poverty alleviation in developing countries.     

Individual Executive Characteristics: Explaining the Divergence Between Perceptual and Financial Measures in Nonprofit Organizations

Significant research has found that corporations have a social responsibility beyond maximizing shareholders' value. This study examines the effect of high-profile corporate bankruptcies on perception of corporate social responsibility. Undergraduate and graduate business students rated the importance of corporate social responsibility on profitability, long-term success and short-term success, before and after high-profile bankruptcies. The results indicated that students in general perceived corporate social responsibility to be more important to profitability and long-term success of the firm and less important to short-term success after media publicity of corporate scandals. Several demographic factors such as gender, age and college major played a role in this perception. These findings have important implications for business education, especially as it relates to corporate social responsibility.     

Parrèsiastic Stakeholders: A Different Approach to Ethical Institutions

Are we really in need of (new) ethical institutions that regulate and control the ethical quality of corporate behavior? The various scandals (Enron, WorldOnline, Ahold) prove that ethical institutions, as well as deontological codes, public social commitments, social annual reports directly linked to financial overviews, are not enough to prevent fraud, corruption or bribery. Does the existence of those institutions partly provoke and legitimize the unbridled and immense power of organizational and CEO-(non-ethical) behavior and window-dressing? Do we need more separate ethical institutions? Is it possible to outsource the competence of an ethical corporate and personal moral responsibility to another, separate institution? Do people and corporations still feel the confrontation with moral dilemmas with the institutionalizing of a part of that responsibility to an anonymous body? And won't this ethical control lead to a further alienation of the micro level personal responsibility to the macro performance of the market and organizations? This article focuses on the counterpart of the institution: tomorrow's stakeholder. The stakeholder of tomorrow (the manager, the CEO, the consumer, the employee, the civil servant...) embodies the complexity of the multi-paradigmatic business ethics debate. Two aspects of tomorrow's stakeholders' presence will be discussed: their moral attitude and emancipative communication.     

Public relations and corporate social responsibility: Some issues arising

The paper questions current assumptions about the benefits of corporate social responsibility and the claims that corporations make on behalf of their corporate social responsibility programmes. In particular, the paper suggests that the use of corporate social responsibility for public relations ends raises moral problems over the motivation of corporations. The paper cautions that the justifications which corporations employ may either be immoral or inaccurate with regard to the empirical evidence gained from a small-scale qualitative study carried out in the UK at a time when the practice of corporate social responsibility was expanding quickly (1989). It is noticeable, in retrospect, that great emphasis is placed upon environmental rather than social responsibility. This implies that organisations are primarily reactive in their development of corporate social responsibility programmes and that they respond to external pressures rather than working out the nature of their corporate responsibilities. It might suggest that corporations only take such actions when they feel compelled to do so by consumerist and environmentalist lobbies. The paper argues that corporations do need to find moral justifications for their moral activities and to ensure that corporate social responsibility practice lives up to the claims made by public relations practitioners. The paper explores the nature of public relations and illustrates how its responsibility for corporate social responsibility extends beyond truthfulness in publicity.Jacquie L'Etang has postgraduate degrees in history, public relations, and social justice. She is a lecturer in public relations at the University of Stirling, Scotland, teaching on the M.Sc. in Public Relations full-time and distance learning courses. She teaches design and editorial management, communications, and business ethics. Her research interests are in corporate social responsibility and the history of public relations.     

To stay or to leave: The moral dilemma of divestment of South African assets

The question of U.S. divestment of South African assets can be segmented into two major issues: (1) corporate behavior in a general sense and (2) nature of the product produced. The first issue has four sub-issues: (1) Is apartheid immoral? (2) Do corporations have any social responsibility? (3) Do the rights of South African blacks concerning the issue of apartheid outweigh those of the corporations to do business freely? (4) Are the benefits to blacks greater with divestment than without? The term “benefits” is then defined in both macro and micro dimensions. A “NO” answer to any one of the several questions would lead to the conclusion that there is no moral obligation for U.S. firms presently in South Africa to divest. The analysis presented will conclude that the answer to the first three questions is “yes”. Further, the answer to the first half of the fourth question (macro benefits) will be determined to be “no”. The micro benefit issue, namely, the nature of the product produced, will then be evaluated using a model based on which group benefits most from the item produced. Assuming corporations are successfully meeting their moral obligations under questions # 2 and # 3, then the general conclusion will be reached that firms producing items of direct benefit to the black community should stay; firms producing items of direct benefit to the government should divest; and no generalized model for analysis can be assumed for firms producing items which benefit both groups equally. Finally, a brief discussion is presented of the issue of obligation for positive action against apartheid, both political and economic, on the part of U.S. corporations.     

Ethics in Business: Answering the Call

What might happen if business leaders across the globe viewed their work as a sacred calling in a religious sense? Might not the world be a far better place? This paper is an effort to stimulate debate and discussion on this topic. Concepts addressed include: (a) ethics in business, (b) ethical standards in business settings, (c) the role of law, (d) levels of corporate responsibility, (e) the role of religion in business ethics, (f) the idea of business as a calling in a religious sense, (g) the elements of modern corporate culture, (h) creating an ethical corporate culture, (i) demonstrating corporate social responsibility, and (j) providing servant leadership. The introduction to the paper shows how these concepts interrelate; its conclusion offers a challenge to business leaders to answer their call to business in the truest sense.     

In defense of social responsibility

Recent journalistic criticism of the concept of corporate social responsibility rests on the assertion that social responsibility adds nothing to corporate profits. Hence, inclusion of the motion in the business vocabulary amounts to nothing more than “double talk.”The author of an influential 1953 book on the topic took another look at social responsibility twenty-five years later and found “few gains in the quality of business stewardship over that time.” The idea “remains peripheral to the mainstream of economic thought.”Corporate social responsibility involves more than simply being a law-abiding corporate citizen. It reaches into these decision-making areas where perfectly legal choices may have harmful social consequences. As evidence of social harm amounts, society has to define and defend the ground on which it requires an appropriate response from the business corporation. Society will get the response it demands.     

Teaching business ethics: Questioning the assumptions,seeking new directions

An examination of leading textbooks suggests the predominance of a principle-based model in the teaching of business ethics. The model assumes that by teaching students the rudiments of ethical reasoning and ethical theory, we can hope to create rational, independent, autonomous managers who will apply such theory to the many quandary situations of the corporate world. This paper challenges these assumptions by asking the following questions: 1. Is the acquisition of principle-based ethical theory unproblematic? 2. What is the transferability of classroom learning to the business context? 3. Is it appropriate to consider complementary models in the teaching of business ethics? The last question is approached from the perspective of virtues-based ethics, from the insights of feminist ethics, and from a culturally grounded orientation to moral values and norms.     

The Reasons Behind Non-Ethical Behaviour in Business and Entrepreneurship

Despite the recent increase in interest in corporate social responsibility and the propagation of corporate governance in both business and academic literature, from observations of actual practice, the author has seen at all company levels, in everyday operations, instances of non-ethical behaviour vis-à-vis the whole gamut of stakeholders. This state of affairs is linked with: pressure from stakeholders, short-term tactics, hegemony of financial considerations, ‘juridisation’ of business, the tyranny of communications and the media and the difficulties in translating strategy into practical implementation. The paper scrutinises the motivation and the psychology of entrepreneurs and business people, and their behaviour is compared to other professional groups and confronted with the decline in ethics in society as described by some important observers. The conclusion drawn is that the recent positive evolutions do not provide sufficient ethical guidelines for the day-to-day activities of middle managers and entrepreneurs in the present competitive environment. Managers will always be confronted by difficult choices with ethical dilemmas. There will always be a tension between theory and pragmatism, but progress can be made with the effective implementation of the ethical discourse in companies. To achieve this, ethical management should not be confined to the large strategic issues but also applied to the small practical matters of everyday business life. Ethics in business and entrepreneurship requires more than corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR).     

Attitudes towards corporate social responsibility and perceived importance of social responsibility information characteristics in a decision context

This study addressed the questions of perceived importance of social responsibility information (SRI) characteristics in a decision context, as well as the attitudes of institutional investors toward social responsibility involvement. The results showed that SRI presently disclosed in company annual reports did not have any significant impact on institutional investors' decisions. However, if SRI were presented in quantified, financial form, and were focused on product improvement and fair business practices, such information would be perceived as more important for investment decisions. Attitudes toward corporate social responsibility also suggested that institutional investors were not totally opposed to company involvement in social activities. Hai Yap Teoh is associate professor in the Department of Accountancy, The University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. He has published extensively in local and international journals including Accounting, Organizations and Society and The International Journal of Accounting Education and Research. His major areas of research interest include corporate social responsibility and reporting.Godwin Shiu is teaching fellow in the Department of Accountancy, The University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia. He is also doing a master's degree in accountancy.     

Corporate Identity of a Socially Responsible University – A Case from the Turkish Higher Education Sector

Facing increased competition, universities are driven to project a positive image to their internal and external stakeholders. Therefore some of these institutions have begun to develop and implement corporate identity programs as part of their corporate strategies. This study describes a Turkish higher education institution’s social responsibility initiatives. Along with this example, the study also analyzes a specific case using concepts from the Corporate Identity and Corporate Social Responsibility literature. The motives leading the university to manage its corporate identity, the social responsibility initiatives in the local and national communities, and the possible benefits of these initiatives for the parties involved are all identified. The major finding is that philanthropy is one of the main elements of Istanbul Bilgi University’s corporate identity program and that the university has altruistic motives for its social responsibility initiatives. 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 a co-authored article published in the Journal of Business Ethics. Tutku Eker is a doctorate student at the Department of Management of Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey. Her research interests include business ethics, corporate social responsibility and branding. She is also a teaching assistant at the Department of Business Administration of Istanbul Bilgi University.     

Entrepreneurs: The world needs you

The way we see the role of business is changing dramatically. What have we learned from the recent and ongoing crises? Where does one look for guidance on the “right thing to do” now? In a world where we live on one globe, it is time to shift our energy to real responsibility and sustainability. This requires a new paradigm. As Albert Einstein said, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” We are not separated from our environment, nature, and society; we are actually a part of it. Therefore, let us unleash entrepreneurship and the power of business in a way to serve us more holistically. This new type of thinking, this expanding consciousness, is giving birth to all the new concepts of social entrepreneurship, corporate social responsibility, corporate sustainability, inclusive business, conscious capitalism, and sustainable development. On the global level, there are increasing numbers of business‐oriented initiatives aimed at steering the power of business toward the public good such as the UN Global Compact and the Business Call to Action. Where to look for inspiration at the individual level? Within yourself. As Mahatma Gandhi said, “You have to be the change you want to see in the world.” © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Why Corporations Should Not Abandon Social Responsibility

Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, in his recent book Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life (2007), rejects outright the call for increased corporate social responsibility. He believes that social responsibility advocates are wasting resources and efforts on a doomed project. This article suggests that while Reich raises several interesting concerns in his counter-intuitive book, especially about the rise in corporate political power, ultimately his argument is unconvincing. Worse yet, a careful reading suggests that Reich does not contemplate fully what it is he is asking business and society to give up in his call to jettison corporate social responsibility. The notion of corporate social responsibility is itself an extremely, valuable, and hard-won social asset. It is a vehicle for promoting transparency, more nuanced accountability, integrity, better communication, mutually beneficial exchange, and sensible development. In providing a language and vocabulary to critique business from both inside and outside its boundaries, it has becomes a necessary condition for business ethics and modern capitalism. It is especially important in a world of increasing global economics. Nevertheless, it is an extremely fragile asset. Books, like Reich’s Supercapitalism, that dismiss corporate social responsibility in such a facile way, are dangerous and risky in ways that perhaps even the authors themselves are unaware.     

Business Ethics and the Management of Non-Profit Institutions

The core of business ethics literature is based upon the stakeholder theory of the firm. The normative function of this theory is to internalise the concept of social responsibility into the definition of the firm (the firm as a social contract) and into the managerial practice (participative management, social and ethical audit). But why should we introduce this business ethics approach into the field of the non-profit sector, which by its origin and mission has already a strong social dimension? Is there a genuine dilemma of social responsibility in non-profjt institutions? The first part of the paper will give a more theoretical answer to this question. The second part will illustrate the relevance of the business ethics approach by presenting an empirical application of the stakeholer theory in the Belgian-Flemish non-profit sector.     

Institutional Conditions of Corporate Citizenship

Exploring the concept of citizenship from the history of political philosophy provides suggestions about what corporate citizenship could mean. The metaphor of corporate citizenship suggests an institutional approach to corporate social responsibility. Citizenship is a social role, characterized by an orientation towards the social contract, collective and active responsibility, as well as a positive attitude towards the juridical state. By analogy, corporate citizenship is a social role, characterized by the social contract of business, a participatory ethics of business, the precautionary principle and the promotion of just international institutions. It is considered that corporate citizenship depends on a number of interacting institutional conditions that hold society partly responsible for the social performance of their companies. Finally, the problem of the dissolution of corporate social responsibility is reviewed in an institutional environment where everyone is considered responsible.     

Effect of Business Education on Women and Men Students’ Attitudes on Corporate Responsibility in Society

This article describes a survey among Finnish business students to find answers to the following questions: How do business students define a well-run company? What are their attitudes on the responsibilities of business in society? Do the attitudes of women students differ from those of men? What is the influence of business education on these attitudes? Our sample comprised 217 students pursuing a master’s degree in business studies at two Finnish universities. The results show that, as a whole, students valued the stakeholder model of the company more than the shareholder model. However, attitudes differed according to gender: women students were more in favor of the stakeholder model and placed more weight on corporate ethical, environmental, and societal responsibilities than their men counterparts – both at the beginning and at the end of their studies. Thus, no gender socialization effect of business school education could be observed in this sense. Business school education was found to shape women and men students’ attitudes in two ways. Firstly, valuation of the shareholder model increased and, secondly, the importance of equal-opportunity employment decreased in the course of education. This raises the question whether the educational context is creating an undesirable tendency among future business professionals. The results further suggest that the sociocultural context can make a difference in how corporate social responsibility is perceived. The article also discusses possible ways to influence the attitudes of business students.     

Mining, Corporate Social Responsibility and the "Community": The Case of Rio Tinto, Richards Bay Minerals and the Mbonambi

Mining companies have long had a questionable reputation for social responsibility, especially in developing countries. In recent years, mining companies operating in developing countries have come under increased pressure as opponents have placed them under greater public scrutiny. Mining companies have responded by developing global corporate social responsibility strategies as part of their larger global business strategies. In these strategies, a prominent place is given to their relationship with local communities. For business ethics, one basic issue is whether such an approach to corporate responsibility is likely to effectively address the development concerns of local communities in developing countries. This paper addresses this question by investigating how the corporate social responsibility agenda of a major minor company has been implemented by one of its subsidiaries in South Africa.