Spirituality In (and Out) of the Classroom: A Pragmatic Approach

This paper is divided into two sections. In the first section, I discuss “what is spirituality?” and in the section that follows, I examine some of the implications of my definition to the teaching of spirituality in an undergraduate business ethics course. For the purposes of this paper, spirituality is defined as the planned experience (the inner feeling) of blending integrity and integration through 1 – acceptance (of the past), 2 – commitment (to the future), 3 – reasonable choice, 4 – mindful action, and 5 –continuous dialog (both internal and external). This definition is a work-in-progress and offered mainly as a point of departure rather than a final destination.     

Sony Online Entertainment: EverQuest® or EverCrack? Oxford Style Debate Presented at Tenth Annual International Conference Promoting Business Ethics

Part C of this three part series is the presentation from the Oxford style debate held at the Tenth Annual International Conference Promoting Business Ethics between Laura Hartman, J.D., and Dr. Moses Pava on topics related to the EverQuest^? v. EverCrack case (Part B). In a traditional Oxford style debate, two debaters take opposing viewpoints and the third debater argues the neutral position. At the Conference, the modified format featured the two debaters presenting diametrically opposing views – corporate responsibility versus personal responsibility. This modified format was also used during the Ethics Awareness Week (Part A), with University professors presenting the debate before the student body. Ms. Hartman’s position focused on the personal responsibility by Mr Woolley while Dr. Pava opined that Sony Online Entertainment had corporate responsibility toward Mr. Woolley and all other individuals similarly situated.     

The Substance of Jewish Business Ethics

Philosophers generally agree that meaningful ethical statements are universal in scope. If so, what sense is there to speak about a business ethics particular to Judaism? Just as a Jewish algebra and a Jewish physics are contradictions in terms, so too, is the notion of a particularly Jewish business ethics. The goal of this paper is to deny the above assertion and to explore the potentially unique characteristic of a Jewish business ethics. Ethics, in the final analysis, is not like algebra or physics. Specifically, it is argued here that – in terms of substance – Jewish business ethics differs from secular approaches in three very specific ways. Jewish ethics: (1) recognizes God as the ultimate source of value, (2) acknowledges the centrality of the community, (3) and holds out the promise that men and women (living in community) can transform themselves. We define Jewish ethics as the interpretation of the written and oral Torah to determine what God commands us to be and to do. The paper carefully explores this definition and examines its specific implications for modern business ethics.     

Religious Business Ethics and Political Liberalism: An Integrative Approach

Increasingly many business practitioners and academics are turning to religious sources as a way of approaching and answering difficult questions related to business ethics. There now exists a relatively large literature which attempts to integrate business decisions and religious values. The integration, however, is not without difficulties. For many, religious ethics provides the basis and the ultimate authority for a morally meaningful life. Yet, at the same time, in certain contexts, it is often inappropriate to rely and to publicly justify action on the basis of these ethics. With this difficulty in mind, the main goal of this paper is to answer the following specific question: Is a religiously grounded business ethics consistent with the idea of political liberalism? While this question is fundamental and straight-forward, to date it has received little, if any, careful attention. The characterization of business corporations as quasi-public, discussed in the body of the paper, implies that political liberalism may dictate that there exist situations in which invoking religious business ethics is inappropriate. The point is that once one removes the assumption of business as a purely private matter, the justification of a religiously grounded ethics in the context of a politically liberal democracy becomes problematic. On the other hand, such an assumption should not be taken to imply that all religiously grounded business ethics are always inappropriate. As this paper demonstrates, it is far from obvious that even government officials need observe a complete separation between religion and state in formulating, justifying, or expressing public policies, even policies leading to so-called coercive results. If so, it follows that managers of quasi-public institutions may, under appropriate and limited circumstances, invoke and rely upon a religious, albeit private, world-view.     

Fairness as a Constraint in the Real Estate Market

Community standards, ethical norms, and perceptions of fairness often serve as constraints on pure profit maximizing behavior. Consider the following examples: Most hardware stores refrain from raising prices on snow shovels after a major snow storm, even where short term profits might be increased. Most employers do not lower wages for existing employees, even as unemployment in the area increases. Automobile dealerships rarely raise sticker prices to cope with the long waiting periods for a popular model. Each of these anomalies is consistent with the proposition that firms increase profits subject to fairness constraints.This paper examines perceptions of fairness in the residential real estate industry and explores how community standards affect economic decision-making. The residential real estate industry is unique. One party to the transaction (the landlord) frames decisions as pure business decisions. The other party to the transaction (the tenant) frames decisions more broadly. While a tenant's choice of apartments is in part viewed as a business decision, tenants consider a broad spectrum of non-business issues, as well.This disjunction between landlord and tenant perceptions can lead to unique ethical quandaries and can explain otherwise anomalous economic behavior in the industry. The hypothetical case examined in this paper is based on a frequently encountered situation in the industry. The paper concludes with practical suggestions for managers.     

Criteria for Evaluating the Legitimacy of Corporate Social Responsibility

The goal of this paper is to provide a general discussion about the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility. Given that social responsibility projects entail costs, it is not always obvious under what precise conditions managers will have a responsibility to engage in activities primarily designed to promote societal goals.In this paper we discuss four distinct criteria for evaluating the legitimacy of corporate projects for institutionalizing social responsibility:(1) local knowledge(2) level of responsibility(3) shared consensus, and(4) relationship to financial performance.We conclude our discussion by noting that in those cases where the firm possesses knowledge about a specific problem and its solution, is directly responsible for causing harm, where a shared consensus among all relevant stakeholders exists, and financial performance will be enhanced, social responsibility projects are ideal. Obviously, no program will meet all of the criteria. In fact, our model specifically suggests that there is often a trade-off between the first three criteria and the last. For example, in those situations where the corporation directly imposes harm on third parties, and where a high degree of consensus exists among all stakeholders, there is little need to link the social responsibility program to financial performance. By contrast, as the corporation seeks proactive solutions to problems which are only incidental to the corporation, and where little consensus exists, the predicted relationship to financial performance becomes more crucial. By formally examining the trade-offs among these four criteria we more fully understand the complex relationship between social responsibility and financial impacts.     

The talmudic concept of “beyond the letter of the law”: Relevance to business social responsibilities

The idea of corporate social responsibility is neither new nor radical. The core belief is that business managers, even in their role as managers, have responsibilities to society beyond profit maximization. Managers, in pursuing their primary goal of increasing shareholder value, have social responsibilities in addition to meeting the minimal requirements of the law. Nevertheless, the call for increased social responsibility on the part of business managers remains controversial. At least two major perspectives on social responsibility can be isolated. The classical view, most closely identified with Milton Friedman, suggests that social responsibility is incompatible with a free enterprise economy. By contrast, advocates of increased social responsibility point out the desirability for voluntary (and at times costly) corporate activities which promote society's well being. The purpose of this essay is to briefly describe both the classical and pro-social responsibility perspectives. We suggest that while important differences in assumptions characterize the two distinct views, there is enough overlap and agreement to move the debate beyond the current stalemate. Specifically, we argue that the concept oflifnim mishurat hadin, an innovative and ancient Jewish legal doctrine which is usually translated as beyond the letter of the law, might serve as a model for modern legal and social thought. We examine talmudic and post-talmudic sources which apply this concept to the area of business ethics, and explore its applicability to the modern situation. Although the business ethics literature rarely refers to Talmudic and rabbinic sources, these texts reflect a sophisticated understanding of business practices and ethical problems. Moses L. Pava, associate professor of accounting is the occupant of the Philip H. Cohen Professorial Chair in Accounting. He has taught at the Sy Syms School of Business of Yeshiva University for the past 5 years. In addition he has taught at Hunter College and New York University. His research interests include financial accounting, business ethics, and the social responsibility of corporations. He has recently published articles in the Journal of Accountancy, Management Accounting, Torah U'Maddah Journal, Managerial Finance, Business Credit, U.S.A. Today.His book, The Shareholder's Use of Corporate Annual Reportsis being published by JAI Press.     

The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost

It is generally assumed that common stock investors are exclusively interested in earning the highest level of future cash-flow for a given amount of risk. This view suggests that investors select a well-diversified portfolio of securities to achieve this goal. Accordingly, it is often assumed that investors are unwilling to pay a premium for corporate behavior which can be described as socially-responsible.Recently, this view has been under increasing attack. According to the Social Investment Forum, at least 538 institutional investors now allocate funds using social screens or criteria. In addition, Alice Tepper Marlin, president of the New York-based Council on Economic Priorities has recently estimated that about $600 billion of invested funds are socially-screened (1992). MOSES L. PAVA is Associate Professor of Accounting and the Alvin Einbender Chair in Business Ethics at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests include financial reporting and business ethics. He has recently published articles in the Journal of Accountancy, Management Accounting, The Financial Executive, and Journal of Applied Business Research. His first book, The Shareholder's Use of Corporate Annual Reports, was published in 1993. JOSHUA KRAUSZ is Gershon and Merle Stern Professor of Banking and Finance at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests are in the areas of financial analysis, ethics and social responsibility, financial accounting, options and derivatives, price behavior, capital budgeting and taxation. He has published in The Review of Economics and Statistics, The Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Accounting Horizons, Applied Economics, The Journal of Extractive Industries Accounting, and The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business.     

The Path of Moral Growth

This paper, following the work of the sociologist Philip Selznick, identifies three stages of moral development in organizations: ethical improvisation, ethical institutionalization, and ethical revival. I argue here that the developmental perspective is inherent in the structure of biblical narrative, especially in the stories of Genesis and Exodus. The paper concludes by debunking three common myths associated with business ethics.