Conceptions of the Firm and Corporate Allegiances
Tóm tắt
This paper aims to integrate recent research on collective agency, corporate moral personhood, and corporate citizenship to answer the question of how corporations and corporate officers should respond to greater social expectations about the role of business in society. The central thesis advanced in this paper is twofold. First, the right answers to questions about corporate purpose and social responsibility depend on what the right conception of the firm is. Different conceptions of the firm will yield conflicting accounts of corporate purpose and responsibilities. Second, a normative theory of the firm can serve as a moral framework to make trade-offs and adjudicate competing stakeholder demands when decisions cannot be redescribed as win–win situations. By integrating the literature on the ontological status of collectives, the morality of corporate agents, and the responsibilities of business, this paper contributes a unique approach to defining what a person is, what the firm is, and, consequently, who has responsibilities (and what sort of responsibilities) to whom.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aguinis, H., and A. Glavas. 2012. What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management 38: 932–968.
Alzola, M. 2011. The ethics of business in Wartime. Journal of Business Ethics 99 (Supplement 1): 61–71.
Crane, A., D. Matten, S. Glozer, and L. Spence. 2019. Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. USA: Oxford University Press.
De los Reyes, G., Jr., M. Scholz, and N.C. Smith. 2017. Beyond the “Win-Win” creating shared value requires ethical frameworks. California Management Review 59 (2): 142–167.
Demuijnck, G., and B. Fasterling. 2016. The social license to operate. Journal of Business Ethics 136: 675–685.
Donaldson, T., and Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics. Harvard Business School Press.
Freeman, R.E., B.L. Parmar, and K. Martin. 2019. The power of and: Responsible business without trade-offs. Columbia University Press.
Friedman, M. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase it profits. New York Times Magazine.
Hansmann, H., and R. Kraakman. 2001. The end of history for corporate law? Georgetown Law Journal 89 (2): 439–468.
Hart, O., and L. Zingales. 2017a. Companies should maximize shareholder welfare not market value. Journal of Law, Finance, and Accounting 2: 247–274.
Hart, O., and L. Zingales. 2017b. Serving shareholders doesn’t mean putting profit above all else. Harvard Business Review 12: 2–6.
Hsieh, N.H. 2006. Voluntary codes of conduct for multinational corporations: Coordinating duties of rescue and justice. Business Ethics Quarterly, 119–135.
List, C., and K. Spiekermann. 2013. Methodological Individualism and Holism in Political Science: A Reconciliation. American Political Science Review 107: 629–642.
Margolis, J.D., and J.P. Walsh. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48: 268–305.
McMahon, C. 1995. The ontological and moral status of organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 541–554.
Moon, J., A. Crane, and D. Matten. 2005. Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (3): 429–453.
Néron, P.Y., and W. Norman. 2008. Citizenship, Inc., Do we really want businesses to be good corporate citizens? Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (1): 1–26.
Orlitzky, M., F.L. Schmidt, and S.L. Rynes. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies 24: 403–441.
Parfit, D. 1984. Reasons and persons. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Porter, M.E., and M.R. Kramer. 2011. Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review 11: 30.
Prahalad, C.K. 2004. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Eradicating poverty through profits. Wharton School Publishing.
Ramanna, K. 2020. Friedman at 50: Is it still the social responsibility of business to increase profits? California Management Review 62 (3): 28–41.
Scherer, A.G., and G. Palazzo. 2011. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies 48 (4): 899–931.
Stout, L. 2012. The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations, and the public. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Tang, Z., C.E. Hull, and S. Rothenberg. 2012. How corporate social responsibility engagement strategy moderates the CSR–financial performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies 49 (7): 1274–1303.
Taylor, J., J. Vithayathil, and D. Yim. 2018. Are corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives such as sustainable development and environmental policies value enhancing or window dressing? Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 25 (5): 971–980.
Van Oosterhout, J.H. 2008. Transcending the confines of economic and political organization? The misguided metaphor of corporate citizenship. Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (1): 35–42.
Vishwanathan, P., H. van Oosterhout, P.P. Heugens, P. Duran, and M. Van Essen. 2020. Strategic CSR: A concept building meta-analysis. Journal of Management Studies 57 (2): 314–350.
Weber, M. (1922). In Economy and Society, eds. Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968.
Wiggins, D. 1968. On being in the same place at the same time. The Philosophical Review 77 (1): 90–95.