Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:11:20.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Theoretical Ground for the Practice of Business Ethics: A Commentary

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Peter Madsen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the second half of 1993, two articles — one then published and one as yet to be published — posed challenges to my presuppositions about the nature of business ethics. The first of these was Andrew Stark’s “What’s the Matter with Business Ethics?” This article is now well-known in business ethics circles with many being highly critical of its philosophical content and Stark already having had some opportunity to reply to these critics. According to him, business ethics as it has developed in the literature and in academia is irrelevant to most practicing managers since what has been produced in the academy is too general, too theoretical and too impractical. No doubt there will be more said about and by Stark on whether academic business ethics can fit into the practical work world of corporate managers. For my part, I suggest that while Stark’s critique of business ethics contains some flawed understanding and analysis, it is a critique that nonetheless needs to be taken seriously by those who wish to see business ethics flourish in the corporation. I will have some more to say about Stark’s position later in this commentary.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , July 1995 , pp. 451 - 462
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1995

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

Notes

1 Stark, Andrew, “What’s the Matter with Business Ethics?” Harvard Business Review, vol.71 (1993), pp. 38–48.

2 In addition to a panel discussion added to the agenda of the 1993 meeting of The Society for Business Ethics held in Atlanta, more formal responses to Stark’s article include: Bowie, Norman E., “Enough Already,” The Society for Business Ethics Newsletter, vol. 4 (1994), pp. 3–4. Duska, Ronald, “Letter to the Editor,” Harvard Business Review, vol. 71 (1993), pp. 188–96. Werhane, Patricia, “Letter to the Editor,” Harvard Business Review, vol. 71 (1993), p. 202.

3 See: Stark, Andrew, “Response to a Rejoinder,” The Society for Business Ethics Newsletter, vol. 4 (1993), pp. 12–15 and “Response,” Harvard Business Review, vol. 71 (1993), pp. 198–203.

4 Brown, H. I., (1988), Rationality (New York: Routledge, 1988).

5 Dienhart, John, “Rationality, Ethical Codes, and an Egalitarian Justification of Ethical Expertise: Implications for Professions and Organizations,” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 5 (1995), pp. 419–50.

6 Ibid., pp. 424–25.

7 Ibid., Business Ethics Quarterly, pp. 440–41.

8 Monast, Joseph H., “What is (and Isn’t) the Matter with ‘What’s the Matter…,’” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 4 (1994), pp. 499–512.

9 Ibid., p. 511.