Abstract
In this article we discuss what are the implications for improving the design of corporate ethics programs, if we focus on the moral motivation accounts offered by main ethical theories. Virtue ethics, deontological ethics and utilitarianism offer different criteria of judgment to face moral dilemmas: Aristotle’s virtues of character, Kant’s categorical imperative, and Mill’s greatest happiness principle are, respectively, their criteria to answer the question “What is the right thing to do?” We look at ethical theories from a different perspective: the question we ask is “Why should I do the right thing?” In other words, we deal with the problem of moral motivation, and we examine the different rationale the main ethical theories provide. We then point out the relation between moral motivation and the concept of rationality in the different approaches – is acting morally seen as an expression of rational behavior? Our analysis of moral motivation provides a useful framework to improve the understanding of the relationships between formal and informal elements of corporate ethics programs, emphasizing the importance of the latter, often overlooked in compliance-focused programs. We conclude by suggesting that the concept of moral imagination can provide a unifying approach to enhance the effectiveness of corporate ethics programs, by providing an intangible asset that supports the implementation of their formal components into management decision making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aristotle: 1999, Nichomachean Ethics. Translated by T.␣Irving. Indianapolis. Hacket Publishing
Beauchamp, T. L. and N. R. Bowie: 1997, Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice Hall)
Boatright, J. R.: 1993, Ethics and the Conduct of Business (Prentice Hall)
Bowie, N. E.: 1999, Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective (Blackwell, Oxford)
Camerer, C. and D. Lovallo: 1999, ‹Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach’, The American Academy Review Vol. 89(1), 306–318
De George, R. T.: 1986, Business Ethics (Prentice Hall)
Donaldson, T. W.: 1989, Ethics in International Business. New York, Oxford University Press
Donaldson, T. W. and P. H. Werhane (eds): 1979, Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach (Prentice Hall)
Dunham L., Freeman R. E., J. Liedtka: 2006, Enhancing Stakeholder Practice: A Particularized Exploration of Community Business Ethics Quarterly 16(1), 23–42
Freeman, R. E.: 2007, ‹Managing for Stakeholders’, in T.␣Beauchamp, N. Bowie and D. Arnold, (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business 8th Edition (Prentice Hall) (Forthcoming)
Gustafson, A.: 2001, J. S. Mill on Moral Sentiments, With Application to Advertising Ethics. PhD Dissertation, Marquette University
Harsanyi, J. C.: 1999, ‹Advances in Understanding Rational Behavior’, in P. K. Moser (ed.), Rationality in Action. Contemporary Approaches (Cambridge University Press), pp. 271–293
Hartman E. M. 1998. The Role of Character in Business Ethics Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(3), 547–559
Hartman E. M.: 2000, An Aristotelian Approach to Moral Imagination, Professional Ethics, 8(3&4), 57–77
Horney K. 1950, Neurosis and Human Growth (Northon & Company, New York)
Hume, D.: 1739, A Treatise on Human Nature. Oxford University Press (2000)
Kahneman, D. and D. Lovallo: 1993, ‹Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking’, Management Science, Vol. 39(1), 17–31
Kahneman D., Tversky A. 1979. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk, Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 47(2), 263–292
Kant, I.: 1785, in M. Gregor (ed.), Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Cambridge University Press) (1998)
Kets De Vries, M. F. R.: 1980, Organizational Paradoxes. Clinical Approaches to Management (Tavistock)
Leipziger, D.: 2003, The Corporate Responsibility Code Book (Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield)
Mill, J. S.: 1871, ‹Utilitarianism’, in R. Crisp (ed.), Oxford Philosophical Texts (Oxford University Press) (1998)
Muthu, S.: 2003, Enlightment Against Empire (Princeton University Press)
Rawls, J.: 1971, A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press)
Rorty R. 2006. ‹Is Philosophy Relevant to Business Ethics?’ Invited Address to the Society for Business Ethics Annual Meeting, August 2005. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(3), 369–380
Sen, A. K. 1977. ‹Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory’, Philosophy and Public Affairs 6(4), 317–344
Sibley, W. M.: 1953, ‹The Rational Versus the Reasonable’, The Philosophical Review, Vol. 62(4) (Oct. 19533), 554–560
Simon H. A. 1955. ‹A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69(1), 99–118
Tenbrunsel, A. E., K. Smith-Crowe and E. E. Umphress: 2003, ‹Building Houses on Rocks: The Role of the Ethical Infrastructure in Organizations’, Social Justice Research, Vol. 16(3), September 2003
US Federal Sentencing Guidelines: 2005, http://www.ussc.gov/orgguide.htm
Velasquez, M. G.: 1982, Business Ethics. Concepts and Cases (Prentice Hall)
Walzer, M.: 1994, Thick and Thin: Moral Argument at Home and Abroad (Notre Dame Press)
Werhane P. H. 1991. Adam Smith and its Legacy for Modern Capitalism, New York: Oxford University Press
Werhane, P.H.: 1999, Moral Imagination and Management Decision Making. The Ruffin Series in Business Ethics (Oxford University Press)
Werhane P. H. 2006. ‹A Place for Philosophers in Applied Ethics and the Role of Moral Reasoning in Moral Imagination: A Response to Richard Rorty’. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(3), 401–408
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
de Colle, S., Werhane, P. Moral Motivation Across Ethical Theories: What Can We Learn for Designing Corporate Ethics Programs?. J Bus Ethics 81, 751–764 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9545-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9545-7