David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 66 (1):89 - 98 (2006)
The way in which accountability is currently employed in business ethics practice is based on a few central assumptions. It is assumed, for instance, that ethical failures result from the deliberate, rational decision-making of moral agents. A second important assumption is that there is a direct cause and effect relationship between the decisions and actions of individuals and the consequences of those decisions. Furthermore, the current approach towards accountability failures relies on the ability on legal sanctions to deter agents from ethical lapses. This paper will argue that these three assumptions do not survive critical interrogation and that our understanding of accountability therefore has to be reconsidered. It will propose that accountability be reconceived as a relational responsiveness towards stakeholders.
|Keywords||accountability moral agency 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
George Lakoff & Mark Johnson (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh the Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought.
A. Macintyre (1984). After Virtue. Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 46 (1):169-171.
Richard Rorty (1999). Philosophy and Social Hope. Penguin Books.
Judith Butler (2005). Giving an Account of Oneself. Fordham University Press.
Pierre Bourdieu (1992). The Logic of Practice. Inquiry 35:447.
Citations of this work BETA
Olivier Boiral, Mario Cayer & Charles M. Baron (2009). The Action Logics of Environmental Leadership: A Developmental Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 85 (4):479 - 499.
Antonio Argandoña & Heidi von Weltzien Hoivik (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility: One Size Does Not Fit All. Collecting Evidence From Europe. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 89 (3):221 - 234.
Michael Gonin (2007). Business Research, Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, and the Inherent Responsibility of Scholars. Journal of Academic Ethics 5 (1):33-58.
Antonio Argandoña & Heidi von Weltzien Hoivik (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility: One Size Does Not Fit All. Collecting Evidence From Europe. Journal of Business Ethics 89 (3):221-234.
Paul Hibbert & Ann Cunliffe (2015). Responsible Management: Engaging Moral Reflexive Practice Through Threshold Concepts. Journal of Business Ethics 127 (1):177-188.
Similar books and articles
Leif Wenar (2006). Accountability in International Development Aid. Ethics and International Affairs 20 (1):1–23.
Jens Steffek (2010). Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (1):45-68.
Nancy B. Kurland (1996). Trust, Accountability, and Sales Agents' Dueling Loyalties. Business Ethics Quarterly 6 (3):289-310.
Annette Rid (2009). Justice and Procedure: How Does “Accountability for Reasonableness” Result in Fair Limit-Setting Decisions? Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (1):12-16.
Linda A. Galindo (2009). The 85% Solution: How Personal Accountability Guarantees Success: No Nonsense, No Excuses. Jossey-Bass.
Andreas Rasche & Daniel E. Esser (2006). From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability. Journal of Business Ethics 65 (3):251 - 267.
Danielle Beu & M. Ronald Buckley (2001). The Hypothesized Relationship Between Accountability and Ethical Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 34 (1):57 - 73.
Mollie Painter-Morland (2007). Defining Accountability in a Network Society. Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (3):515-534.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #150,602 of 1,725,158 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #210,933 of 1,725,158 )
How can I increase my downloads?