IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jmaeth/v8y2020i2p1-3n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting Carr’s Business Bluff: Opinions on the Ethics of Playing the Game

Author

Listed:
  • Fowler David S.
  • Musgrave Jon

    (Newberry College, South Carolina, USA; Morehead State University, Kentucky, USA)

Abstract

This article is a response to Albert Carr’s business bluff compared to a poker game article in the Harvard Business Review “Is Business Bluffing Ethical? The Ethics of Business are not Those of Society, but Rather Those of the Poker Game”. Opinions are given on the ethical dilemmas which are deemed legal and acceptable in the business world by Carr.

Suggested Citation

  • Fowler David S. & Musgrave Jon, 2020. "Revisiting Carr’s Business Bluff: Opinions on the Ethics of Playing the Game," Journal for Markets and Ethics, Sciendo, vol. 8(2), pages 1-3, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jmaeth:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:1-3:n:2
    DOI: 10.2478/jome-2020-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/jome-2020-0004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/jome-2020-0004?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carson, Thomas, 1993. "Second Thoughts About Bluffing," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(4), pages 317-342, October.
    2. Lawrence Friedman, 1971. "Optimal Bluffing Strategies in Poker," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(12), pages 764-771, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List & David H. Reiley, 2010. "What Happens in the Field Stays in the Field: Exploring Whether Professionals Play Minimax in Laboratory Experiments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1413-1434, July.
    2. Rebecca Guidice & G. Alder & Steven Phelan, 2009. "Competitive Bluffing: An Examination of a Common Practice and its Relationship with Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(4), pages 535-553, July.
    3. Filipe Sobral & Gazi Islam, 2013. "Ethically Questionable Negotiating: The Interactive Effects of Trust, Competitiveness, and Situation Favorability on Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 281-296, October.
    4. Steven Levitt & John List & David Reiley, 2010. "What happens in the field stays in the field: Professionals do not play minimax in laboratory experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00080, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Marian Eabrasu, 2020. "Cheating in Business: A Metaethical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 519-532, March.
    6. Benedict Sheehy, 2015. "Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(3), pages 625-648, October.
    7. Denise Fleck & Roger J. Volkema & Sergio Pereira, 2016. "Dancing on the Slippery Slope: The Effects of Appropriate Versus Inappropriate Competitive Tactics on Negotiation Process and Outcome," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 873-899, September.
    8. Kasim Khorasanee, 2024. "Spoof, Bluff, Go For It: A Defence of Spoofing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 201-215, January.
    9. Matthew Brophy, 2015. "Spirituality Incorporated: Including Convergent Spiritual Values in Business," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 779-794, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Business Bluff; Business Ethics; Moral Opinion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A1 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics
    • B3 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought: Individuals
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    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:vrs:jmaeth:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:1-3:n:2. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.