IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pkk/meb010/85-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Exploring Enterprise Life Cycle: Differences in Informal and Formal Institutional Measures of Business Ethics Implementation

Author

Listed:
  • Jernej Belak

    (Faculty of Economics and Business Maribor)

  • Borut Milfelner

    (Faculty of Economics and Business Maribor)

Abstract

Since science recognizes the fact that an enterprise passes through different life cycle stages, and that life cycle stages differ in terms of management systems, formal structures, control systems, documentation of transactions, and number of procedural hurdles, our main research problem was focused on differences in informal and formal institutional measures of business ethics implementation. The case study research methodology was applied to explore the differences of informal and formal institutional measures of business ethics implementation at different stages of enterprise life cycle. The pre-designed questionnaire was used in conducting face-to-face interviews with 40 managers who were in most cases also owners of the studied enterprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Jernej Belak & Borut Milfelner, 2010. "Exploring Enterprise Life Cycle: Differences in Informal and Formal Institutional Measures of Business Ethics Implementation," Proceedings-8th International Conference on Mangement,Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2010),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:pkk:meb010:85-102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://kgk.uni-obuda.hu/sites/default/files/6_BELAK-MILFELNER.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Lašáková & Anna Remišová & Ľubica Bajzíková, 2021. "Differences in Occurrence of Unethical Business Practices in a Post-Transitional Country in the CEE Region: The Case of Slovakia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-33, March.

    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:pkk:meb010:85-102. 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: Alexandra Vécsey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.html .

    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.