IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v6y1996i02p201-222_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Ethics Matters: A Defense of Ethics in Business Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Velasquez, Manuel

Abstract

I argue that Plato was right in claiming that justice is more profitable, more rational, and more intrinsically valuable than injustice, and that this is particularly true for business organizations. The research on prisoners’ dilemmas and social dilemmas shows that ethical behavior is more profitable and more rational than unethical behavior in terms of both the negative sanctions on unethical behavior when interactions with stakeholders are iterated, and the positive rewards of habitually ethical behavior when stakeholders can identify those who are predisposed to be ethical. In addition, the psychological research on justice shows that justice is intrinsically valued, both from an outcome and from a process perspective, and so crucial for business organizations, particularly in terms of organizational effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Velasquez, Manuel, 1996. "Why Ethics Matters: A Defense of Ethics in Business Organizations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 201-222, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:6:y:1996:i:02:p:201-222_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00012446/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. Anthony J. Daboub & Jerry M. Calton, 2002. "Stakeholder Learning Dialogues: How to Preserve Ethical Responsibility in Networks," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-98, November.
    2. Julia Grant & Timothy Fogarty, 1998. "Faculty evaluation as a social dilemma: a game theoretic approach," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 225-248.
    3. Elizabeth E. Umphress & John B. Bingham, 2011. "When Employees Do Bad Things for Good Reasons: Examining Unethical Pro-Organizational Behaviors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 621-640, June.
    4. John Parnell & Gregory Scott & Georgios Angelopoulos, 2013. "Benchmarking Tendencies in Managerial Mindsets: Prioritizing Stockholders and Stakeholders in Peru, South Africa, and the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 589-605, December.
    5. Kurt Wurthmann, 2013. "A Social Cognitive Perspective on the Relationships Between Ethics Education, Moral Attentiveness, and PRESOR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 131-153, April.

    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:6:y:1996:i:02:p:201-222_01. 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.