Business and Society Review 120 (3):465-490 (2015)

Authors
Hasko von Kriegstein
Ryerson University
Abstract
This article argues that shareholder primacy cannot be defended on the grounds that there is something special about the position of shareholders that grounds a right to preferential treatment on part of management. The notions of property and contract, traditionally thought to ground such a right, are now widely recognized as incapable of playing that role. This leaves shareholder theorists with two options. They can either abandon the project of arguing for their view on broadly deontological grounds and try to advance consequentialist arguments instead, or they can search for other morally relevant properties that could ground shareholder rights. The most sustained argument in the latter vein is Marcoux’s attempt to show that the vulnerability of shareholders mandates that managers are their fiduciaries. I show that this argument leads to the unacceptable conclusion that it would be unethical for corporations to make incomplete contracts with nonshareholding stakeholders.
Keywords shareholder primacy  Alexei Marcoux  business ethics
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/basr.12063
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Upload history
External links

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

Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis.Kenneth E. Goodpaster - 1991 - Business Ethics Quarterly 1 (1):53-73.
A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory.Alexei M. Marcoux - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):1-24.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Professionalism, Agency, and Market Failures.Hasko von Kriegstein - 2016 - Business Ethics Quarterly 26 (4):445-464.
Oxymoron: Taking Business Ethics Denial Seriously.Hasko von Kriegstein - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics Education 16:103-134.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’.Samuel Mansell - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 117 (3):583-599.
Shareholder Activism.Maria Goranova & Lori Verstegen Ryan - 2012 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 23:160-169.
A Network Analysis of Shareholder Activism.Donald H. Schepers - 2007 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 18:351-356.
The Limits of Shareholder Value.Peter Koslowski - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 27 (1-2):137 - 148.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-10-21

Total views
157 ( #55,396 of 2,329,874 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
17 ( #35,184 of 2,329,874 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes