IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v10y2000i03p563-591_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Framework for Discussing Normative Theories of Business Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Bishop, John Douglas

Abstract

This paper carries forward the conceptual clarification of normative theories of business ethics ably begun by Hasnas in the January 1998 issue of BEQ. This paper proposes a normatively neutral framework for discussing and assessing such normative theories. Every normative theory needs to address these seven issues: it needs to specify a moral principle that identifies (1) recommended values and (2) the grounds for accepting those values. It also must specify (3) a decision principle that business people who accept the theory can use. It must determine (4) who the normative theory applies to and (5) whose interests need to be considered. It must also outline (6) in what contexts it applies, and (7) what legal and regulatory structures it assumes. Once clarified, this paper applies the framework to the normative versions of stockholder theory, stakeholder theory, and ISCT. It is concluded that ISCT is the most promising normative theory currently under discussion, but that there are some major issues that ISCT has not dealt with yet.

Suggested Citation

  • Bishop, John Douglas, 2000. "A Framework for Discussing Normative Theories of Business Ethics," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 563-591, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:10:y:2000:i:03:p:563-591_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00000890/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tiina Onkila, 2009. "Corporate Argumentation for Acceptability: Reflections of Environmental Values and Stakeholder Relations in Corporate Environmental Statements," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 285-298, June.
    2. William Keep, 2009. "Furthering Organizational Priorities with Less Than Truthful Behavior: A Call for Additional Tools," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 81-90, April.
    3. Nicholas Santos & Gene Laczniak & Tina Facca-Miess, 2015. "The “Integrative Justice Model” as Transformative Justice for Base-of-the-Pyramid Marketing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(4), pages 697-707, February.
    4. Thomas Dunfee, 2006. "A Critical Perspective of Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Recurring Criticisms and Next Generation Research Topics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 303-328, October.
    5. Harald Bergsteiner & Gayle Avery, 2012. "When Ethics are Compromised by Ideology: The Global Competitiveness Report," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(4), pages 391-410, September.
    6. K. A. Van Peursem & A. Julian, 2006. "Ethics Research: an Accounting Educator's Perspective," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 16(38), pages 13-29, March.
    7. Santos Nicholas J.C. & Laczniak Gene R., 2012. "Marketing to the Base of the Pyramid: A Corporate Responsibility Approach with Case Inspired Strategies," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-44, April.
    8. Rajshekhar G. Javalgi & La Toya M. Russell, 2018. "International Marketing Ethics: A Literature Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(4), pages 703-720, April.
    9. Pedro FrancŽs-G—mez & Lorenzo Sacconi & Marco Faillo, 2012. "Behavioral Business Ethics as a Method for Normative Business Ethics," Econometica Working Papers wp42, Econometica.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:10:y:2000:i:03:p:563-591_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.