Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:57:54.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Moral Hazards on the Road to the “Virtual” Corporation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Thomas M. Jones  and
Norman E. Bowie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

In recent years, two topics have made prominent debuts in the management literature—“virtual” corporations and trust within and among organizations. These two themes are related in that trust is important to the success of the virtual corporation. This article argues that confidence in the development of virtual corporations may be premature because of what we call the Virtual Corporation Paradox. This paradox can be succinctly stated: the short-term, transient deal-making on which the efficiency of the virtual corporation rests greatly impedes the development of the mutually trusting and cooperative relationships on which its success depends. We examine both economic and sociological explanations for the emergence of trust in similar situations and find both deficient. We conclude that the success of virtual corporations will ultimately depend on an ethics-based form of corporate “character” that allows firms to develop trusting relationships without the usual safeguards or social norms.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , April 1998 , pp. 273 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alchian, Armin & Harold, Demsetz. 1972. “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization.” American Economic Review, 62: 777–795.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. Brian. 1996. “Increasing Returns and the New World of Business.” Harvard Business Review, 74(4) (July-August): 100–109.Google ScholarPubMed
Axelrod, Robert. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation (New York: Basic Books).Google Scholar
Baier, Annette. 1986. “Trust and Antitrust.” Ethics, January: 233–260.Google Scholar
Baier, Kurt. 1967. The Moral Point of View (New York: Random House).Google Scholar
Barney, Jay B. & Hansen, Mark B. 1994. “Trustworthiness As A Source of Competitive Advantage.” Strategic Management Journal, 15 (Special Issue): 175–190.Google Scholar
Brown, Tom. 1993. “Think in Reverse.” Industry Week, 242 (July 19): 14–22.Google Scholar
Bromiley, Philip & Cummings, Larry L. 1995. “Transactions Costs in Organizations With Trust,” in Research on Negotiation in Organizations, JAI Press Inc., 5: 219–247.Google Scholar
Burns, T. & Stalker, G. M. 1961. The Management of Innovation (London: Tavistock).Google Scholar
Byrne, John. 1993. “The Virtual Corporation.” Business Week, Feb. 8: 98–102.Google Scholar
Davidow, William H. & Malone, Michael S. 1992. The Virtual Corporation (New York: Harper Collier).Google Scholar
Dawes, R. M. 1994. House of Cards: Psychology and Psychotherapy Built on Myth (New York: The Free Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Paulo, B. M., Zuckerman, M., & Rosenthal, R. 1980. “Humans as Lie Detectors.” Journal of Communication, 30(4): 129–139.Google Scholar
Frank, Robert. 1988. Passions Within Reason (New York: W. W. Norton & Company).Google Scholar
Goldman, Steven L. 1994. “Co-operating to Compete: From Alliances to Virtual Companies.” CMA Magazine, 68 (March): 13–17.Google Scholar
Handy, Charles. 1995. “Trust and the Virtual Organization.” Harvard Business Review, 73 (May-June): 40–50.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. 1651/1958. Leviathan (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill).Google Scholar
Jensen, M. C. & Meckling, W. H. 1976. “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure.” Journal of Financial Economics, 3:305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Thomas M. 1995. “Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics.” Academy of Management Review, 20(2): 404–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, Randy W. 1994. “It’s About Control.” Inc., 16 (August): 25–26.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. 1988. “ Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives,” in Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, D. Gambetta (ed.) (Oxford: Basil Blackwell): 94–108.Google Scholar
Mayer, Roger C., Davis, James H., & Schoorman, F. David. 1995. “An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust.” Academy of Management Review, 20(3): 709–734.Google Scholar
Meyerson, Debra, Karl, Weick, & Roderick, Kramer. 1996. “Swift Trust and Temporary Groups,” in Trust in Organizations, Kramer, Roderick M. & Tyler, Tom B. (eds.) (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.): 166–195.Google Scholar
Powell, Walter W. 1996. “Trust-Based Forms of Governance,” in Trust in Organizations, Kramer, Roderick M. & Tyler, Tom R. (eds.) (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.): 50–67.Google Scholar
Ring, Peter S. 1996. “Fragile and Resilient Trust and Their Roles in Economic Exchange.” Business & Society, 35: 148–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabel, C. F. 1993. “Studied Trust: Building New Forms of Cooperation in a Volatile Economy.” Human Relations, 46(9): 1133–1170.Google Scholar
Teece, David J. 1987. “Profiting From Technological Innovation: Implications For Integration, Collaboration, Licensing, and Public Policy,” in Teece, David J. (ed.), The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal (New York: Harper & Row), 185–219.Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism (New York: The Free Press).Google Scholar