IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v153y2018i1d10.1007_s10551-016-3353-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Friedman’s View on Individual Freedom Relates to Stakeholder Theory and Social Contract Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Johannes Jahn

    (ESCP Europe Business School)

  • Rolf Brühl

    (ESCP Europe Business School)

Abstract

Friedman’s view on corporate social responsibility (CSR) is often accused of being incoherent and of setting rather low ethical standards for managers. This paper outlines Friedman’s ethical expectations for corporate executives against the backdrop of the strong emphasis he puts on individual freedom. Doing so reveals that the ethical standards he imposes on managers can be strictly deduced from individual freedom and that these standards involve both deontological norms and the fulfillment of particular stakeholder expectations. These insights illustrate the necessity to reconsider how Friedman’s approach relates to other important normative theories of business ethics. Contrasting Friedman’s approach with stakeholder theory and integrative social contract theory—when considering the importance he assigns to individual freedom—shows how and why these approaches differ. Still, the comparison also highlights striking similarities. This paper contributes to a better understanding of Friedman’s position—which is still one of the most influential approaches in business ethics research—because it enables a differentiated look at its strengths and weaknesses.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:153:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3353-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-016-3353-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-016-3353-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-016-3353-x?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. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Blake E. Ashforth & Barrie W. Gibbs, 1990. "The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(2), pages 177-194, May.
    3. Russo, J Edward & Metcalf, Barbara L & Stephens, Debra, 1981. "Identifying Misleading Advertising," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 8(2), pages 119-131, September.
    4. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    5. Van Buren, Harry J., 2001. "If Fairness is the Problem, Is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 481-499, July.
    6. Borghesi, Richard & Houston, Joel F. & Naranjo, Andy, 2014. "Corporate socially responsible investments: CEO altruism, reputation, and shareholder interests," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 164-181.
    7. Rowan, John R., 2001. "How Binding the Ties? Business Ethics as Integrative Social Contracts - Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business EthicsThomas Donaldson and Thomas W. Dunfee Boston: Harvard Business Sch," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 379-390, April.
    8. Donaldson, Thomas & Dunfee, Thomas W., 1995. "Integrative Social Contracts Theory," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 85-112, April.
    9. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    10. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    11. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    12. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    13. Dunfee, Thomas W. & Donaldson, Thomas, 1995. "Contractarian Business Ethics: Current Status and Next Steps," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 173-186, April.
    14. Heath, Joseph, 2006. "Business Ethics without Stakeholders," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 533-557, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Ignacio Ferrero & W. Michael Hoffman & Robert E. McNulty, 2012. "Must Milton Friedman Embrace Stakeholder Theory?," Faculty Working Papers 10/12, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
    17. James, Harvey S. & Rassekh, Farhad, 2000. "Smith, Friedman, and Self-Interest in Ethical Society," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 659-674, July.
    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. Jianzhuang Zheng & Muhammad Usman Khurram & Lifeng Chen, 2022. "Can Green Innovation Affect ESG Ratings and Financial Performance? Evidence from Chinese GEM Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.
    2. Ronald Paul Hill, 2020. "Freedom of the Will and Consumption Restrictions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(2), pages 311-324, June.
    3. Safiullah, Md & Kabir, Md. Nurul & Miah, Mohammad Dulal, 2021. "Carbon emissions and credit ratings," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Wang, Lu-Yao & Hu, Hai-Hua & Wang, Le & Qin, Jian-Qun, 2022. "Privacy assurances and social sharing in social commerce: The mediating role of threat-coping appraisals," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    5. Keigo Fujikura & Akitsu Oe, 2023. "The Influence of Firms’ Pragmatic Legitimacy on Investors’ Perceptions of Their Environmental Protection Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Pengcheng Tang & Xuan Liu & Yao Hong & Shuwang Yang, 2023. "Moving beyond economic criteria: Exploring the social impact of green innovation from the stakeholder management perspective," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 1042-1052, May.
    7. Andreas Ostermaier & Dominik Aaken, 2020. "Freedom trumps profit: a liberal approach to business ethics," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(5), pages 947-962, June.
    8. Fernando García & Jairo González-Bueno & Francisco Guijarro & Javier Oliver, 2020. "Forecasting the Environmental, Social, and Governance Rating of Firms by Using Corporate Financial Performance Variables: A Rough Set Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Anne Vijver, 2022. "Morality of Lobbying for Tax Benefits: A Kantian Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 57-68, November.

    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. 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.
    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. Allen Kaufman & Ernie Englander, 2011. "Behavioral Economics, Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 421-438, September.
    5. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    6. Li, Chengcheng & Wang, Xiaoqiong, 2022. "Local peer effects of corporate social responsibility," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Giovanni Ferri & Angelo Leogrande, 2015. "Was the Crisis due to a shift from stakeholder to shareholder finance? Surveying the debate," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 108, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    9. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    10. Thomas Maak & Nicola M. Pless & Christian Voegtlin, 2016. "Business Statesman or Shareholder Advocate? CEO Responsible Leadership Styles and the Micro-Foundations of Political CSR," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 463-493, May.
    11. Yuan Ding & Thomas Jeanjean & Hervé Stolowy, 2013. "Accounting for Stakeholders or Shareholders? The Case of R&D Reporting," Post-Print hal-01002936, HAL.
    12. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    13. Pursey Heugens & J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein, 2006. "Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 211-228, October.
    14. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    15. J. van Oosterhout & P.P.M.A.R. Heugens & S.P. Kaptein, 2003. "The Internal Morality of Contacting: Redeeming the Contractualist Endeavor in Business Ethics," Working Papers 03-15, Utrecht School of Economics.
    16. Sybille Sachs & Edwin Rühli & Claude Meier, 2010. "Stakeholder Governance as a Response to Wicked Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 57-64, August.
    17. Jose-Luis Godos-Díez & Roberto Fernández-Gago & Laura Cabeza-García, 2015. "Business Education and Idealism as Determinants of Stakeholder Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 439-452, October.
    18. Jongwon Park & Sunyoung Kim & Albert Tsang, 2023. "CEO Personal Hedging and Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 199-221, January.
    19. Pamela Queen, 2015. "Enlightened Shareholder Maximization: Is this Strategy Achievable?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 683-694, March.
    20. Thomas M Maak & Nicola M Pless & Christian Voegtlin, 2016. "Business Statesman or Shareholder Advocate? CEO Responsible Leadership Styles and the Micro-Foundations of Political CSR," Post-Print hal-01480535, HAL.

    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:153:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-016-3353-x. 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.