Wisdom includes the practical application of knowledge, experience, reason, introspection, and intuition, but does its presence impact the ethical attitudes of individuals within organizations? Using Ardelt’s three-dimensional wisdom scale (2003) and a revised version of the ethical attitude measures developed by Wood, Longenecker, McKinney, and Moore (1988), empirical analysis was conducted using 329 responses from non-instructional staff at three colleges located in the southeast. This study is among the first to empirically test the impact of wisdom in a business setting, and also to empirically test the relation between wisdom and ethical attitudes. Correlation and regression analysis results indicated that greater wisdom was positively related to ethical attitudes and the rejection of questionable business practices that are harmful to others and the environment. Also, age was found to be positively related to an individual’s rejection of ethically questionable activities. These findings suggest that developing and encouraging higher levels of wisdom among employees within an organization will likely result in more ethical business practices.

Most corporate stakeholders agree that Corporate Responsibility (CR) ought to be part of modern business management and practice. Academic work has been seminal to a fruitful and collaborative relationship between business and society. A closer examination of the contemporary academic narratives on CR, however, reveals a plethora of positions orbiting this complex construct, rendering it and its applications opaque, amorphous, and contested. The bewildering array of conceptualizations and applications leads not only to unintended consequences but also to concrete negative outcomes for most stakeholders. In this study, we map the conceptual landscape of CR in academia by systematically analyzing 120 audio and video recordings of university sponsored or endorsed CR-focused workshops, business meetings, interviews, lectures, conference presentations, roundtable events, and debates deposited at the media repository iTunesU and held between 2010 and 2014. The recordings were analyzed using Content Configuration Analysis, a qualitative analysis method related to content and thematic analyses. Our results show how business ethics in academia are often debated in opposition to or independent from business and economic concerns. We highlight seven major shortcomings within this conceptual space, relating to conceptual disunion, Eurocentrism, lack of specificity with regard to domains, stakeholder bias, areas of application, and normativity. Recommendations to overcome some of these shortcomings are presented to develop policy-relevant and change-oriented approaches to CR, which would make academic work on business ethics more applicable to globalized business and business practices, as well as to further develop collaborative partnerships between academia, business, and society.

This paper provides an analysis of conscience-based refusals in healthcare from a Sartrean view, with an emphasis on the tension between individual responsibility and professional role morality. Conscience-based refusals in healthcare involve healthcare workers refusing to perform actions based on core moral beliefs. Initially this appears in line with Sartrean authenticity, which requires acknowledgment that one is not identical with professional role. However, by appealing to Sartre’s later social thought, I show that professional role morality is authentic when one considers common group practices, which Sartre refers to as pledged group praxis. I demonstrate that for healthcare providers, authenticity mandates putting the goals and generally accepted praxis of healthcare front and center in the workplace decision process. I conclude by strengthening Andrew West’s existentialist decision-making model with Sartre’s later social thought. With the updated model, I show that for healthcare workers most often the authentic decision is to perform generally accepted healthcare procedures in spite of individual moral qualms. This is because working in healthcare necessitates viewing one’s professional tasks in their broader social context—as unified, communal group praxis.

Several European and North American states encourage or even require, via good Samaritan and duty to rescue laws, that persons assist others in distress. This paper offers a utilitarian and contractualist defense of this view as applied to corporations. It is argued that just as we should sometimes frown on bad Samaritans who fail to aid persons in distress, we should also frown on bad corporate Samaritans who neglect to use their considerable multinational power to undertake disaster relief or to confront widespread social ills such as those currently befalling public health (obesity) and the environment (climate change). As such, the corporate duty to assist approach provides a novel justification for sustainable business practices in such cases. The paper concludes by arguing that traditional stakeholder approaches have not articulated this duty of assistance obligation, though a new utilitarian stakeholder theory by Thomas Jones and Will Felps may be coextensive.

Executive compensation is wrought with problems of moral judgment. To the extent that compensation rewards or penalizes behavior for which an executive is not justifiably responsible, it is also a problem of luck. Although executive compensation is both a problem of morality and luck, moral luck—which seems to occur when our moral judgments about a moral agent's conduct or character are influenced by factors beyond the agent's control—has not been a factor in the compensation debate. There remains controversy as to whether moral luck is a real or imagined problem, but if it exists, it should be factored into the compensation equation; if it does not, we cannot deny that moral performance presents a measurement problem. Thus, we are forced to accept that moral luck, real or imagined, has important implications for the ways and means by which executives are compensated.

This paper is about how multiple contexts influence employees’ and managers’ enactments of a standardized corporate code of ethics. An earlier local Swedish case study of how a code is enacted is extended to include enactments during business trips to Ottawa (Canada), Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) and New Delhi (India). The paper shows that although the code is possible to enact as remote and insignificant (‘not relevant to me’) in the local study, when travelling to different contexts it is enacted as intrusive (affecting core operations) and fluid (highlighting seeming contradictions). The paper highlights the consequences of these enactments in terms of management control and individual responsibility) and suggests ways for better understanding how a code is expected to perform, meant to work and keep on working.

This article explores the prevailing assumption of instrumentalism in negotiation and argues that contrary to the popular conception in negotiation scholarship, negotiators need not be assumed to be ontologically individualistic or purely self-interested in their motivation and action. We show the contribution that can be made to the field by an approach to negotiation that does not presume a strong and inevitable self-interest as the fundamental starting point of any account of negotiation behavior and we offer ideas for an alternative starting point, which we call the agentic-relational model.

This article addresses the need for discourse and dialogue on ethics in the fields of Animal Assisted Therapy (AAT) in general and Equine-assisted Therapy (EAT) specifically. Utilizing animals as partners in a therapeutic process requires major cultural paradigm shifts regarding intelligence and emotion and consideration of the ethical implications for the care and agency of these animals. There is a paucity of literature and very little is known about the impact that therapy has on animals. This study suggests that this blind spot may be the result of the legacy of underlying, post-Christian, Western scientific beliefs about human-animal relationships. Practitioners in the field tend to fall into the broad categories of ‘utilitarians’ or ‘stewards’. The author, an EAT practitioner from Native American cultural healing tradition, offers suggestions on the ways in which Native American constructs about animals may provide valuable alternatives to commonly-held Western viewpoints creating opportunities for deeper, more authentic relationships, reciprocity and a greater understanding of horse-human relationships.

This article proposes a theory of the firm based on the concept of common good provided by the Aristotelic-Thomistic (A-T) and Catholic Social Thought (CST) traditions, with particular attention given to the concept of work. We argue that the incorporation of a concept of work, based on the A-T and CST traditions, provides a better understanding of the firm´s common good in terms of sociability, cooperation, personal fulfillment and friendship. In this manner, taking into account an A-T and CST concept of work, we provide a better understanding of different aspects in which the common good can be achieved within the firm.

The continuous inclusion of new technologies in organizations challenges business ethics and creates new problematics in work life. Managers in particular are challenged insofar as they must learn how to adapt general technological hardware to local organizational needs and work habits. Based on new empirical research conducted in Danish health care organizations, it investigates how managers experience technologies and how these experiences affect their professional ethics; it asks: a) What kinds of ethics do managers consider when using new technologies? b) How are these ethics negotiated? Using a techno-human practice approach—which takes into account both human and non-human entities as the basis of moral judgment—the new technologically-induced ethical dilemmas faced by managers are discussed. A typology of techno-ethics is introduced, which presents situated ways of engaging with technologies in businesses. By employing multiple ethics connected to the use of technologies in organizations might make managers more ethically responsible in decisions concerning technologies.

The Global Economic Ethic Manifesto is a credo embodying a set of basic transcultural values aimed at encouraging ethical dealings by business enterprises. However, through analysis of documents and expert interviews, study findings reveal that there has been little adoption and/or implementation of the Ethic Manifesto since its celebrated United Nations launching in 2009. Only sixty-three signatories have signed on, consisting of a majority of individuals, and the remaining twenty-seven are primarily affiliated with European business enterprises. Our study recommendations include tighter integration of the Ethic Manifesto with the Global Compact; an organizational commitment, i.e., by the CEO and board of directors, to the Ethic Manifesto; a broad-based reporting requirement on general progress in meeting the Ethic Manifesto’s principles; and business enterprise use of a logo indicating conformance with the principles of the Ethic Manifesto to stakeholders, all of which could improve business enterprise participation in this civil society initiative.

This article responds to the review of Hemphill and Lillevik, “The Global Economic Manifesto: A Retrospective.” It aims to contribute to the worldwide discussion of global accepted norms and values of corporate behavior by addressing universal ethical principles and implementation strategies. A focus is set on the means of specifying values to serve the action orientation of an organization and its management. Since external normative expectations rise in context of the upcoming Post-2015 Development Agenda, corporate responses need to take local specifics as well as international accepted norms into account. Therefore, a distinctive implementation design is outlined. Key strategic steps contain elements such as (1) awareness of common values, (2) differing consequences due to cultural environments and economic conditions, (3) integration of practical experience to gain impact-related insights, and (4) fostering global leadership education. Consequently, corporate value management approaches and Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda are connected through universal values.

There is general agreement that the principles espoused by the Global Economic Ethic Manifesto are to be commended. Despite this, the expectations of wide adoption of the Ethic Manifesto that were expressed at the 2009 launch have proved to be overly optimistic as Hemphill and Lillevik discovered in their study. They propose a number of recommendations to address some of the Ethic Manifesto’s limitations and increase adoption of it, particularly by organizations. However, it is not clear that, even if all their recommendations were to be fully implemented, organizational adoption rates of the Ethics Manifesto will reach the same level as those of the UN Global Compact. For this to occur, the Ethics Manifesto must move beyond providing a moral compass to individuals in order to inform organizational systems and structures in a meaningful way.

Global Economic Ethic is a stunning set of principles. However, in this response I shall raise some questions concerning its implementation. First, from the perspective of a global Western-based transnational corporation, there are ambiguities in the principles and implementation in practice. Second, from a non-Western cultural perspective, one has to to think about whether and how these principles could be interpreted in different non-European/non–North American cultural settings. Finally, the biggest challenge is whether or how we as individuals, as executives and managers, and as part of the global community work to change political climates of corruption, domination, patronage, and protectionism, climates that hinder or preclude going forward with the adoption and operationalization of these principles everywhere.

Environmental, social and ethical issues have become increasingly important for businesses due to changed customer expectations, more regulation and stakeholder pressure, amongst others. This led to the development of concepts such as sustainability management, corporate social responsibility (CSR), stakeholder management and business ethics. Though mostly developed in isolation, scholars have increasingly worked on their integration. This editorial sheds light on (missing) overlaps between these concepts. We find that sustainability management and CSR have become more integrated and are increasingly grounded in an “embedded view“ in which business and society is part of (and constrained by) the natural environment. In contrast, business ethics has not been integrated to the same extent, expect for the subfield of environmental ethics. After this general overview, we introduce the individual contributions to the special issue which are advancing the conceptual and empirical foundation of sustainability management, CSR, and business ethics.

The basic idea of the conceptual paper is to discuss the notion of value creation in the business and society field and to present the public value concept as a way of extending the understanding of business’s value creation for society. First, the paper draws on the value balance accountability (VBA) model by Schwartz and Carroll, in which value creation is identified as a central element in the business and society field. Second, based on this, we critically evaluate the VBA model’s value notion, which appears to be relatively vague and narrow. Third, in order to tackle these gaps, we present Meynhardt’s public value approach, which provides an extended notion of value creation. We further propose a combined public value-balance-accountability-framework. Public value fills the framework’s value dimension with actual content and provides a microfoundation. It helps to overcome the separation fallacy. The combined framework contributes to both theory and practice in the business and society field.

The business case for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a powerful driver for mainstreaming socially responsible behavior in corporate practice. This is because managers’ proclivity to assume responsibility is positively correlated with their expectations that CSR pays off. However, there is the danger that managers might be tempted to focus primarily on those CSR activities that allow to link the associated costs and benefits ex ante reliably which, in turn, is a precondition for a perceived business case. Unfortunately, the perceived business case for CSR activities that prevent irresponsible behavior (“avoiding bad”) is rather weak. In contrast, CSR in terms of the voluntary engagement for society (“doing good”) is quite promising for the perceived business case. In consequence, a business case–driven approach to CSR might foster “cherry picking” behavior, in the sense that managers might tend to reduce CSR to “doing good” and put less efforts on CSR in terms of “avoiding bad” which, in turn, increases the risk of irresponsible business practices.