IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v19y2009i01p33-56_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reasoned Moral Agreement: Applying Discourse Ethics within Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Stansbury, Jason

Abstract

Whether at the executive or the line-management levels, businesspeople face moral decisions that cannot be easily resolved with reference to a shared ethos, whether because of diversity of ethea in the organization or its environment, or because the organization's ethos is inadequate for the problem at hand. These decisions are made more common by the changing norms of a pluralistic business environment, and require collective moral deliberation to be adequately resolved. Discourse ethics ideally characterizes the form of valid collective moral deliberation. I argue that accommodation for the limitations of actual discourse makes discourse ethics, conceived in terms of the rules of practical discourse, practical for realizing improvements in the openness and validity of moral decision-making over states in which these rules are flagrantly violated. These rules have normative implications at the organizational level for the integrity approach to corporate ethics programs, and at the individual level for ethical leadership.

Suggested Citation

  • Stansbury, Jason, 2009. "Reasoned Moral Agreement: Applying Discourse Ethics within Organizations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 33-56, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:19:y:2009:i:01:p:33-56_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00008459/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. R. Edward Freeman & Jared Harris, 2009. "Creating Ties That Bind," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 685-692, October.
    2. Montgomery Van Wart, 2014. "Contemporary Varieties of Ethical Leadership in Organizations," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 5(5), pages 27-45, September.
    3. Dr. Shiang-Min Meng, 2013. "The Application of Mengzi to Today’s Ethical Criteria for Maritime Leadership in Taiwan," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 3(5), pages 1227-1235, May.
    4. Christian Voegtlin & Moritz Patzer & Andreas Scherer, 2012. "Responsible Leadership in Global Business: A New Approach to Leadership and Its Multi-Level Outcomes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Martínez, Cecilia & Skeet, Ann Gregg & Sasia, Pedro M., 2021. "Managing organizational ethics: How ethics becomes pervasive within organizations," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 83-92.
    6. Richard Arend, 2013. "Ethics-focused dynamic capabilities: a small business perspective," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 1-24, June.
    7. William Rehg, 2023. "Business Firms as Moral Agents: A Kantian Response to the Corporate Autonomy Problem," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(4), pages 999-1009, April.
    8. Kristian Alm & Mark Brown, 2021. "John Rawls’ Concept of the Reasonable: A Study of Stakeholder Action and Reaction Between British Petroleum and the Victims of the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 621-637, September.
    9. Christian Voegtlin, 2011. "Development of a Scale Measuring Discursive Responsible Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 57-73, January.
    10. Cedric E. Dawkins, 2021. "An Agonistic Notion of Political CSR: Melding Activism and Deliberation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(1), pages 5-19, April.
    11. Mar Pérezts & Jean-Philippe Bouilloud & Vincent Gaulejac, 2011. "Serving Two Masters: The Contradictory Organization as an Ethical Challenge for Managerial Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(1), pages 33-44, March.
    12. Johannes Brinkmann, 2013. "Combining Risk and Responsibility Perspectives: First Steps," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(4), pages 567-583, February.
    13. Cynthia Stohl & Michael Etter & Scott Banghart & DaJung Woo, 2017. "Social Media Policies: Implications for Contemporary Notions of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 413-436, May.

    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:19:y:2009:i:01:p:33-56_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.