Online research in philosophy

A group of economists has recently begun addressing questions at the intersection of ethics and economics. They are preparing newdefinitions of individual choice that combine self-interest and other interest, new processes of interpersonal exchange that result incooperation rather than conflict. and new measures of social well-being that include rights as well as outcomes. This article surveysthat work, and suggests areas where conceptual inputs from business ethicists are clearly needed, and where multiple opportunities for interactive research are obviously present.

We have a very decent belief structure or general paradigm underlying Business Ethics as a formal field of study. It has an explicitmoral base. It can be stated in simple and direct terms. It has been developed over a number of recent years by a group of respected scholars from a variety of academic disciplines. It is, however, subject to multiple interpretations and open to extensive conflicts. We caneasily tolerate if not benefit from the differing interpretations. We must—at some point—moderate (...) if not resolve the debilitating conflicts. The argument I wish to make in this paper is that we have reached that point. It is time to resolve the conflicts, and the way todo so is to generate awkward, undeniable facts through basic empirical research. Those facts will then have to be incorporated intoacceptable—and eventually accepted—theory. (shrink)

This article is the result of a survey taken to determine the respect and position of Business Ethics as a field of study within Schools of Business Administration. 379 questionnaires were delivered to individual, not institutional, subscribers to Business Ethics Quarterly. 158 were filled out and returned, for a response rate of 41.6%. The general finding from an analysis of those responses is that many persons active in the teaching and research of Business Ethics at large (over 10000 students) and (...) very large (over 30000 students) universities, both public and private, believe that neither their teaching nor their research "count" for merit salary increases and promotion/tenure decisions at their institutions, and that few enjoy high levels of support from deans, faculty, or students. (shrink)

Investigations of large scale industrial accidents generally take one of two alternative approaches to identifying the cause or causes of those destructive events. The first is legal analysis, which focuses on the mechanical failure or human error that immediately preceded the accident. The second is socio-technical reasoning, which centers on the complexities of the interlocking technological and organizational systems that brought about the accident. Both are retrospective, and provide little insight into the means of avoiding industrial accidents in the future. (...) This article looks at six levels of managerial responsibility within a firm, and suggests specific changes at all levels that should logically help in the prevention or mitigation of these high impactllow probability events. The most basicneed, however, is for imagination, empathy, and courage at the most senior level of the firm. (shrink)

Professors Bill Shaw and John Corvino, in a response article published in the July, 1996 issue of Business Ethics Quarterly, provide a clearly courteous and obviously well-intended criticism of my original (1994) position on the question of why a manager, and in consequence an organization, should be moral. I disagree with their reasoning and, because I believe that this form of the “Why Be Moral?” question lies at the heart of any potential juncture between our field of business ethics and (...) the economic and behavioral disciplines of business management, I should like to reply in what I hope will be equally courteous and well-intended terms. (shrink)

The first issue of Business Ethics Quarterly appeared five years ago. This article classifies the content of the 141 articles that have appeared since that time along 18 dimensions, and 118 categories within those dimensions, to determine trends within the discipline. The major trend appears to be a shift in focus towards the increased discussion of a new approach/paradigm for the field, and towards a normative/descriptive interface of the theory. The major problem seems to be a lack of explicit conceptual (...) definition and beginning empirical effort to support that new focus, which may thus prove unsustainable over time. (shrink)

The authors, one an ethicist and the other an economist, look at the issue of free trade with Mexico and other low wage rate countries from the viewpoints of their disciplines. The conclusion of the paper is that these disciplines differ on their priorities and analytical methods, not on their objectives.

It is proposed that mangers have to be moral, have to be concerned about the distribution of benefits and the allocation of harms brought about by their decisions and actions, in order to build trust, commitment, and effort among the stakeholders of the firm. Trust, commitment, and effort on the part of all of the stakeholders are essential for long-term corporate success, given the economic conditions of intense global competition that now exist for the foreseeable future.

Audio-visual material is extremely useful in the teaching of Business Ethics, yet no bibliography of the commercially available films and videotapes seems to be available. We have prepared a formal listing, complete with titles, descriptions, sources, prices and a brief evaluation, and have explained our selection and use of this material.

There is a possibility that the ethical problems that have recently surfaced at General Electric, E. F. Hutton and General Dynamics are not simple anomalies, but the direct result of corporate pressures on individual managers. The author looks at the nature of these pressures, which come from the strategic planning systems in use at most large corporations, and concludes that the current emphasis upon improvements in competitive positioning have led many managers to take actions that are directly contrary to the (...) moral standards, either explicit or implied, of their organizations. (shrink)

A recent survey indicated that the majority of schools of business administration do not offer courses in business ethics and/or the social responsibilities of business firms. The author examines the reasons for the omission of these courses, and concludes that faculty in the major disciplines and techniques of management do not recognize the complexity of ethical problems or the importance of ethical decisions in the overall management of large business organizations.

There is a very apparent conflict between economists and ethicists over the moral standards that should be applied to the managers of business firms. The view of most economists is that moral standards in business are not relevant, beyond the normal personal obligations to speak the truth and observe the law, because profit maximizing behaviour, under market and resource constraints, leads inexorably to social welfare optimization. The opposing view of most humanists is that modern markets are not competitive enough to (...) be constraining, that profit maximization often leads to social harm, and that welfare benefits are unjustly distributed. The article examines the moral constructs in microeconomic theory and the ethical objections to that theory at both the pragmatic and theoretic levels, and concludes that inappropriate assumptions about the nature and worth of human beings in the economic paradigm require the use of moral standards for business decisions and actions. (shrink)