IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mlucee/20084.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Pies, Ingo
  • Hielscher, Stefan
  • Beckmann, Markus

Abstract

This paper argues that the perspective of ordonomic—a rational-choice based analysis of (interdependencies between) social structure and semantics—can provide new insights into the changing role of business in society. We claim (a) that the proper role of business is societal value creation, (b) that business firms—as economic players— can take on the role of improving the rules of the game, i.e., act as corporate citizens, and (c) that business ethics can and should provide theoretical guidance for “corporate citizenship” and the political processes of “new governance,” in which business firms, together with civil society organizations and state actors, work together to solve problems, especially at an international (and sometimes even global) scale. Finally, we show (d) that this perspective requires overcoming two blind spots in recent discourse about the appropriate analytical foundations of business ethics.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mlucee:20084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/170303/1/dp2008-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCreary, Eugene C., 1968. "Social Welfare and Business: The Krupp Welfare Program, 1860–1914," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 24-49, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Arthur T. Denzau & Douglass C. North, 1994. "Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31, February.
    4. Petrick, Martin, 2004. "Governing structural change and externalities in agriculture: toward a normative institutional economics of rural development," IAMO Discussion Papers 73, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    5. Martin Petrick & Ingo Pies, 2007. "In search for rules that secure gains from cooperation: the heuristic value of social dilemmas for normative institutional economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 251-271, June.
    6. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    7. Scherer, Andreas Georg & Palazzo, Guido & Baumann, Dorothée, 2006. "Global Rules and Private Actors: Toward a New Role of the Transnational Corporation in Global Governance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 505-532, October.
    8. Ghatak, Maitreesh & Guinnane, Timothy W., 1999. "The economics of lending with joint liability: theory and practice," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 195-228, October.
    9. Edward Freeman, R. & Phillips, Robert A., 2002. "Stakeholder Theory: A Libertarian Defense," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 331-349, July.
    10. Boatright, John R., 1999. "Does Business Ethics Rest on a Mistake?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 583-591, October.
    11. Raff, Daniel M G & Summers, Lawrence H, 1987. "Did Henry Ford Pay Efficiency Wages?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(4), pages 57-86, October.
    12. Heath, Joseph, 2006. "Business Ethics without Stakeholders," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 533-557, October.
    13. Buttkereit, Sören & Pies, Ingo, 2006. "The economic ethics of social dilemmas," Discussion Papers 2006-2, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    14. Beckmann, Markus & Pies, Ingo, 2007. "Responsibility and economics," Discussion Papers 2007-6, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    15. Moon, Jeremy & Crane, Andrew & Matten, Dirk, 2005. "Can Corporations be Citizens? Corporate Citizenship as a Metaphor for Business Participation in Society," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 429-453, July.
    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. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2012. "The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic concept of corporate citizenship developed in comparison with the Aristoleian idea of individual citizenship," Discussion Papers 2012-1, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    2. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2009. "Competitive markets, corporate firms, and new governance - An ordonomic conceptualization," Discussion Papers 2009-13, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    3. Ingo Pies & Philipp Schreck & Karl Homann, 2021. "Single-objective versus multi-objective theories of the firm: using a constitutional perspective to resolve an old debate," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-811, April.
    4. Jukka Mäkinen & Eero Kasanen, 2016. "Boundaries Between Business and Politics: A Study on the Division of Moral Labor," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 103-116, March.
    5. David Rönnegard & N. Craig Smith, 2024. "A Rawlsian Rule for Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 295-308, March.
    6. Markus Beckmann & Stefan Hielscher & Ingo Pies, 2014. "Commitment Strategies for Sustainability: How Business Firms Can Transform Trade‐Offs Into Win–Win Outcomes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 18-37, January.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Hielscher, Stefan & Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus, 2007. "Wie können Corporate Citizens voneinander lernen? Anregungen für den Global Compact der Vereinten Nationen," Discussion Papers 2007-13, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    10. Petrick, Martin, 2008. "Theoretical and methodological topics in the institutional economics of European agriculture. With applications to farm organisation and rural credit arrangements," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 45, number 92318.
    11. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2007. "Mind the Gap! - Ordonomische Überlegungen zur Sozialstruktur und Semantik moderner Governance," Discussion Papers 2007-16, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    12. Bert Scholtens & Feng‐Ching Kang, 2013. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Earnings Management: Evidence from Asian Economies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 95-112, March.
    13. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    14. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.
    15. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    16. Heidbrink Ludger, 2012. "Unternehmen als politische Akteure. Eine Ortsbestimmung zwischen Ordnungsverantwortung und Systemverantwortung / Companies as political actors. Locating regulatory responsibility and systemsresponsibi," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 203-232, January.
    17. Jeffery Smith, 2018. "Efficiency and Ethically Responsible Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 603-618, July.
    18. Jose Luis Retolaza & Maite Ruiz & Leire San‐Jose, 2009. "CSR in business start‐ups: an application method for stakeholder engagement," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(6), pages 324-336, November.
    19. Hielscher Stefan & Beckmann Markus, 2009. "Social Entrepreneurship und Ordnungspolitik: Zur Rolle gesellschaftlicher Change Agents am Beispiel des Kruppschen Wohlfahrtsprogramms / Social Entrepreneurship and Ordnungspolitik," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 60(1), pages 435-462, January.
    20. Lisa Herzog, 2017. "No Company is an Island. Sector-Related Responsibilities as Elements of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 135-148, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    business ethics; corporate citizenship; corporate social responsibility; new governance; ordonomics; rational choice; social dilemmas; stakeholder theory;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A12 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Other Disciplines
    • A13 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Relation of Economics to Social Values
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    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:zbw:mlucee:20084. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wwhalde.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.