David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 39 (1-2):101 - 108 (2002)
The stakeholder approach offers the opportunity to consider corporate responsibility in a wider sense than that afforded by the stockholder or shareholder approaches. Having said that, this article aims to show that this theory does not offer a normative corporate responsibility concept that can be our response to two basic questions. On the one hand, for what is the company morally responsible and, on the other hand, why is the corporation morally responsible in terms of conventional and post-conventional perspectives? The reason why the stakeholder approach does not offer such a definition, as we shall see, is because the normative stakeholder approaches tend to confuse the social validity with the moral validity or legitimacy. It leads us to a conventional definition of corporate moral responsibility (CMR) that is not relevant to the pluralistic and global framework of our societies and economies. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate this intuition.
|Keywords||business ethics discourse ethics moral responsibility normative approach post-conventional perspective responsibility stakeholder theory|
|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
Virginia G. Maurer (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility and the "Divided Corporate Self": The Case of Chiquita in Colombia. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 88 (4):595 - 603.
Similar books and articles
Joseph Heath & Wayne Norman (2004). Stakeholder Theory, Corporate Governance and Public Management: What Can the History of State-Run Enterprises Teach Us in the Post-Enron Era? Journal of Business Ethics 53 (3):247-265.
Stephen Wilmot (2000). Corporate Moral Responsibility in Health Care. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 3 (2):139-146.
David W. Shoemaker (2011). Psychopathy, Responsibility, and the Moral/Conventional Distinction. Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (s1):99-124.
Stephen Wilmot (2001). Corporate Moral Responsibility: What Can We Infer From Our Understanding of Organisations? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 30 (2):161 - 169.
Rita C. Manning (1984). Corporate Responsibility and Corporate Personhood. Journal of Business Ethics 3 (1):77 - 84.
Wim Dubbink & Jeffery Smith (2011). A Political Account of Corporate Moral Responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (2):223-246.
Jeffery Smith (2011). A Political Account of Corporate Moral Responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (2):223 - 246.
John Hasnas (2012). Reflections on Corporate Moral Responsibility and the Problem Solving Technique of Alexander the Great. Journal of Business Ethics 107 (2):183-195.
Michelle Greenwood (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4):315 - 327.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #195,080 of 1,102,037 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #192,049 of 1,102,037 )
How can I increase my downloads?