IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v113y2013i3p489-504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Vulnerability and the Basis of Business Ethics: From Fiduciary Duties to Professionalism

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Brown

Abstract

This paper examines the role of vulnerability in the basis of business ethics by criticizing its role in giving a moral substantial character to fiduciary duties to shareholders. The target is Marcoux’s (Bus Ethics Q 13(1):1–24, 2003 ) argument for morally substantial fiduciary duties vis-à-vis the multifiduciary stakeholder theory. Rather than proceed to support the stakeholder paradigm, a conception of vulnerability is combined with Heath’s 2004 ) “market failure” view of the ethical obligations of managers as falling out of their roles as professionals involved in the institution of the market. The result is the core of a theoretically defensible and managerially motivating and deployable ethic. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Brown, 2013. "Vulnerability and the Basis of Business Ethics: From Fiduciary Duties to Professionalism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 489-504, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:113:y:2013:i:3:p:489-504
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1318-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-012-1318-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-012-1318-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marcoux, Alexei M., 2003. "A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-24, January.
    2. Marens, Richard & Wicks, Andrew, 1999. "Getting Real: Stakeholder Theory, Managerial Practice, and the General Irrelevance of Fiduciary Duties Owed to Shareholders," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 273-293, April.
    3. Buchanan, Allen, 1996. "Perfecting Imperfect Duties: Collective Action to Create Moral Obligations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 27-42, January.
    4. Boatright, John R., 1994. "Fiduciary Duties and the Shareholder-Management Relation: or, What's so Special About Shareholders?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 393-407, October.
    5. Laufer, William S., 2006. "Corporate Bodies and Guilty Minds," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226470405, September.
    6. Heath, Joseph, 2006. "Business Ethics without Stakeholders," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 533-557, October.
    7. Hasnas, John, 1998. "The Normative Theories of Business Ethics: A Guide for the Perplexed," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 19-42, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Belal, Ataur Rahman & Cooper, Stuart M. & Khan, Niaz Ahmed, 2015. "Corporate environmental responsibility and accountability: What chance in vulnerable Bangladesh?," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 44-58.
    2. Adams, Dawda & Adams, Kweku & Ullah, Subhan & Ullah, Farid, 2019. "Globalisation, governance, accountability and the natural resource ‘curse’: Implications for socio-economic growth of oil-rich developing countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 128-140.
    3. Adams, Dawda & Adams, Kweku & Attah-Boakye, Rexford & Ullah, Subhan & Rodgers, Waymond & Kimani, Danson, 2022. "Social and environmental practices and corporate financial performance of multinational corporations in emerging markets: Evidence from 20 oil-rich African countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Adnan Faridi, Akhtar Baloch, 2019. "Training and Development Methods affecting Professionalism and Empowerment of Banking Sector Employees," Journal of Management Sciences, Geist Science, Iqra University, Faculty of Business Administration, vol. 6(2), pages 75-92, October.
    5. Mark S. Schwartz, 2016. "Ethical Decision-Making Theory: An Integrated Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 755-776, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joseph Heath, 2011. "Business Ethics and the ‘End of History’ in Corporate Law," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 5-20, March.
    2. Silke Machold & Pervaiz Ahmed & Stuart Farquhar, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Ethics: A Feminist Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 665-678, September.
    3. Jocelyn D. Evans & Elise Perrault & Timothy A. Jones, 2017. "Managers’ Moral Obligation of Fairness to (All) Shareholders: Does Information Asymmetry Benefit Privileged Investors at Other Shareholders’ Expense?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 81-96, January.
    4. N. Craig Smith & David Rönnegard, 2016. "Shareholder Primacy, Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Role of Business Schools," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 463-478, March.
    5. Clement, Ronald W., 2005. "The lessons from stakeholder theory for U.S. business leaders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 255-264.
    6. Michael Buckley, 2013. "A Constructivist Approach to Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(4), pages 695-706, November.
    7. Helen J. Mussell, 2023. "Theorising the Fiduciary: Ontology and Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(2), pages 293-307, August.
    8. Miguel Alzola, 2018. "Decent Work: The Moral Status of Labor in Human Resource Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(4), pages 835-853, February.
    9. Christopher, Joe, 2010. "Corporate governance—A multi-theoretical approach to recognizing the wider influencing forces impacting on organizations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 21(8), pages 683-695.
    10. Miguel Alzola, 2011. "The Reconciliation Project: Separation and Integration in Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(1), pages 19-36, March.
    11. Blanche Segrestin & Kevin Levillain & Armand Hatchuel, 2016. "Purpose-driven corporations: how corporate law reorders the field of corporate governance," Post-Print hal-01323118, HAL.
    12. Tullberg, Jan, 2013. "Stakeholder theory: Some revisionist suggestions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 127-135.
    13. Avshalom Adam & Tal Shavit, 2009. "Roles and responsibilities of boards of directors revisited in reconciling conflicting stakeholders interests while maintaining corporate responsibility," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 13(4), pages 281-302, November.
    14. Y. Fassin, 2008. "The Stakeholder Model Refined," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/529, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    15. Brink, Alexander, 2011. "Spezifische Investitionen als Legitimationsgrundlage für Stakeholderansprüche," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 65(1), pages 50-68.
    16. Argandoña, Antonio, 2005. "Firm, market economy and social responsibility," IESE Research Papers D/600, IESE Business School.
    17. Velamuri, Rama & Venkataraman, Sankaran, 2005. "Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: A knightian insight," IESE Research Papers D/591, IESE Business School.
    18. Johannes Jahn & Rolf Brühl, 2018. "How Friedman’s View on Individual Freedom Relates to Stakeholder Theory and Social Contract Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 41-52, November.
    19. Cynthia Clark & Harry Van Buren, 2013. "Compound Conflicts of Interest in the US Proxy System," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 355-371, August.
    20. Wayne Norman, 2011. "Business Ethics as Self-Regulation: Why Principles that Ground Regulations Should Be Used to Ground Beyond-Compliance Norms as Well," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 43-57, March.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:113:y:2013:i:3:p:489-504. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.