Globalization and the good corporation: A need for proactive co-existence
Journal of Business Ethics 43 (1-2):21 - 31 (2003)
| Abstract | Large corporations are coming under intense pressure to act in a socially responsible manner. Corporations have accepted this notion provided that it is exercised voluntarily. It has also been argued that corporations can do well by doing good, and that good ethics is good business. This paper presents an alternative viewpoint by demonstrating that while voluntary socially responsible conduct is desirable, it plays a rather small role in inspiring good corporate conduct. Instead, (a) it is the external economic-competitive conditions that define the parameters and opportunities for good corporate conduct; and (b) the values and traditions of the corporations, and their perceived risk in exploiting those opportunities, that influence the extent of a corporation''s socially responsible conduct. The framework presented here analyzes certain market-competitive conditions, which determine the scope and direction of socially responsible corporate conduct, and the instruments available to society to enhance ethical corporate conduct. It suggests that from society''s perspective, we should move away from the notion of corporate social responsibility and toward corporate social accountability. Most modern economies operate under conditions of imperfect competition where corporations gain above-normal profits, i.e., market rent, from market imperfections. Therefore, corporations should be held accountable for a more equitable distribution of these above-normal profits with other groups, e.g., customers, employees, etc., who were deprived of their market-based gains because of market imperfections and corporate power. Three approaches are suggested for measuring corporate accountability through corrections. These are: information imbalance, bargaining power imbalance, and, adjudication, remedy and relief imbalance. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJames C. Gaa (forthcoming). Corporate Governance and the Responsibility of the Board of Directors for Strategic Financial Reporting. Journal of Business Ethics.
James K. Rowe & Ronnie D. Lipschutz (2005). Corporate Codes of Conduct as a Global Business Strategy. International Corporate Responsibility Series 2:1-45.
Jacob Naor (1982). A New Approach to Multinational Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 1 (3):219 - 225.
Elisabet Garriga & Domènec Melé (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1-2):51-71.
R. Boddy Clive, K. Ladyshewsky Richard & Peter Galvin (forthcoming). The Influence of Corporate Psychopaths on Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment to Employees. Journal of Business Ethics.
Mary Lyn Stoll (2002). The Ethics of Marketing Good Corporate Conduct. Journal of Business Ethics 41 (1-2):121 - 129.
John R. Boatright (2009). Rent Seeking in a Market with Morality: Solving a Puzzle About Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 88:541 - 552.
S. Prakash Sethi (1994). Imperfect Markets: Business Ethics as an Easy Virtue. Journal of Business Ethics 13 (10):803 - 815.
Linda M. Sama (1998). Ethical Behavior as a Strategic Choice by Large Corporations. Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (1):85-104.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads16 ( #74,590 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
