David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):393-407 (1994)
The claim that managers have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to run the corporation in their interests is generally supported by two arguments: that shareholders are owners of a corporation and that they have a contract or agency relation with management. The latter argument is used by Kenneth E. Goodpaster, who rejects a multi-fiduciary, stakeholder approach on the grounds that the shareholder-management relation is “ethically different” because of its fiduciary character. Both of these arguments provide an inadequate basis for the fiduciary duties of officers and directors of corporations. The basis is to be found, rather, in considerations of public policy, a point that was established in the Dodd-Berle exchange of the 1930s. This conclusion also shows the inadequacy of Goodpaster’s solution to the so-called stakeholder paradox, and an alternative solution to the paradox is presented
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Yves Fassin (2009). The Stakeholder Model Refined. Journal of Business Ethics 84 (1):113 - 135.
Samantha Miles (2012). Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 108 (3):285-298.
Paul K. Shum & Sharon L. Yam (2011). Ethics and Law: Guiding the Invisible Hand to Correct Corporate Social Responsibility Externalities. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 98 (4):549 - 571.
Eric Brown (2013). Vulnerability and the Basis of Business Ethics: From Fiduciary Duties to Professionalism. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 113 (3):489-504.
Miguel Alzola (2011). The Reconciliation Project: Separation and Integration in Business Ethics Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 99 (1):19 - 36.
Similar books and articles
Alexei M. Marcoux (2003). A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):1-24.
Rutheford B. Campbell Jr & Christopher W. Frost, Managers' Fiduciary Duties in Financially Distressed Corporations: Chaos in Delaware (and Elsewhere).
Andrew Wicks (1999). Getting Real. Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (2):273-293.
George R. Gay (2003). Fiduciary Duty and Socially Responsible Investing. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):49-54.
Ian Maitland (1994). The Morality of the Corporation. Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):445-458.
Allen Kaufman (2002). Managers' Double Fiduciary Duty: To Stakeholders and to Freedom. Business Ethics Quarterly 12 (2):189-214.
Matthew Lister (2012). Review of Sovereignty’s Promise: The State as Fiduciary by Evan Fox-Decent. [REVIEW] Ethics 123 (1):150-4.
Kenneth E. Goodpaster (1991). Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly 1 (1):53-73.
Ned Dobos (2011). Non-Libertarianism and Shareholder Theory: A Reply to Schaefer. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 98 (2):273 - 279.
George J. Staubus (2005). Ethics Failures in Corporate Financial Reporting. Journal of Business Ethics 57 (1):5 - 15.
Peter Koslowski (2000). The Limits of Shareholder Value. Journal of Business Ethics 27 (1-2):137 - 148.
William Martin (2009). Socially Responsible Investing: Is Your Fiduciary Duty at Risk? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 90 (4):549 - 560.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads34 ( #124,589 of 1,934,655 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #145,854 of 1,934,655 )
How can I increase my downloads?