Journal of Business Ethics最新文献

This study explored how the nature of CEOs’ human capital affects the scope of their firms’ corporate social responsibility initiatives. By integrating upper echelons theory with the attention-based view of the firm, the analyses showed that generalist CEOs with a broader range of knowledge and skills tend to aim their firms’ corporate social responsibility efforts toward a broader range of responsibility domains than do specialist CEOs with a narrower range of knowledge and skills. The difference is weaker when a firm’s board has a sustainability committee or when industry peers are active in a broad range of corporate social responsibility domains. These findings are supported by data on S&P 1500 firms spanning 2000 to 2018.

Contemporary society operates beyond safe boundaries of the Earth system. Returning to a safe operating space for humanity within Earth system boundaries is a question of justice. The relevance of the economy—and thus of business—for bringing society back to a safe and just operating space highlights the importance of business ethics research for understanding the role of business in Earth system justice. In this commentary, we explore the relevance of business ethics research for understanding the crucial role of business in the dynamics of the Earth system. We do so by integrating the perspectives of business ethics and system-oriented sustainability science on the basis of the theory of metabolic rift, which explains how the dynamics of capitalism result in the destruction of the natural environment. On this basis, we argue that a mutually reinforcing relationship between perpetual economic growth and profit seeking behaviour of business, which we call the loop of unsustainability, continually deepens the metabolic rift and keeps business from effectively contributing to Earth system justice. This perspective allows us to formulate firm-level and system-level preconditions for attaining Earth system justice, and to sketch a research agenda that links business ethics scholarship with questions of Earth system justice.

Virtue signaling serves to express moral and ethical values publicly, showcasing commitment to social and sustainable ideals. This research, conducted with non-WEIRD samples to mitigate the prevalent WEIRD bias (i.e., the tendency to solely rely on samples from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic societies), examines whether the scarcely studied virtue-signaling construct mediates the influence of consumers’ attachment anxiety (vs. avoidance) on their green purchase behavior and prosocial responses. Drawing on attachment theory and the emerging virtue-signaling literature, the current work reports the results from three studies (N_total = 898) in which consumers’ attachment patterns were not only measured, as in most prior related research, but also manipulated. Study 1 confirmed the unique ability of measured attachment anxiety, but not attachment avoidance, to predict consumers’ green purchase behavior and prosocial tendencies, with virtue signaling mediating these links. Study 2 manipulated participants’ attachment patterns, finding further support for the mediating role of virtue signaling between attachment anxiety (vs. avoidance) and these dependent variables. Study 3 provided a more nuanced account for our virtue-signaling conceptualization by documenting that self-oriented, but not other-oriented, virtue signaling mediated the link between attachment anxiety and both our key outcomes in public contexts. From a managerial viewpoint, these findings indicate that anxiously attached consumers constitute a potentially lucrative segment for companies seeking to expand their market share of sustainable and ethically produced products.

30 years ago, R. Edward Freeman levied an influential challenge against the “separation thesis”, which maintains that ethical and business concerns are distinct and separable. However, achieving an integration of empirical and normative research continues to pose significant challenges. In this article, it is argued that the tradition of philosophical pragmatism offers a pathway to bridge this divide. While Freeman’s critique is rooted in pragmatism, it falls short of fully embracing the pragmatist turn as advocated by Charles S. Peirce and John Dewey, who extended the methodologies of empirical inquiry to ethical issues. Typically, this pragmatist turn has been sidelined due to the formidable objection that norms and values cannot be empirically confirmed nor disconfirmed. This objection is critically examined, arguing that it is largely based on conceptions of science associated with positivism and logical empiricism, effectively challenged by pragmatism. Embracing a pragmatist perspective, it is argued, can substantially enhance both theoretical and empirical research within business ethics. This approach entails integrating observations that pertain to the values, norms and responsibilities of businesses. Conversely, with a comprehensive understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of such proposals, observations can help determine which ethical theories and perspectives best accommodate empirical findings. Additionally, pragmatism presents a novel approach to the role of business in society, enabling businesses to engage in democratic processes of inquiry into value.

The audit profession’s technical and ethical standards require the application of professional skepticism throughout the financial statement audit process, as auditor skepticism is essential for detecting financial statement fraud and protecting the investing public. However, recent research suggests that audit supervisors often punish staff for exercising skepticism, presenting auditors with an ethical conflict between acting in their own self-interest and acting in a way that improves audit quality and protects the public. This research also suggests that supervisors who reward appropriate skeptical behavior, regardless of the outcome, appear to develop staff that are more likely to detect and convey fraud red flags to their superiors. Building on this research, we use a case-based survey to identify the characteristics of audit supervisors (audit seniors and managers) who are more likely to reward appropriate skepticism, even if it ultimately does not identify a misstatement. We find that trait skepticism, especially suspending one’s judgment, positively drives the evaluations of professional skepticism in our setting. Also, we observe that when supervisors believe that their own audit partner will view the skepticism favorably, they “pay it forward” by rewarding their own staff who engage in skepticism. Our findings identify the characteristics that audit firms may want to develop and foster in auditors rising to supervisory levels.

Racial injustice in employment demands the attention of business organizations because it profoundly shapes our life prospects. While comparing the ideal of perfectly equal opportunity with its invariably imperfect alternatives can impede reform, the true challenge lies in addressing persistent inequities as we strive for equality. This article introduces “shared inequity” as a frame of reference for assessing workplace racial disparities and emphasizing a collective responsibility to remedy systemic issues. In critiquing an exaggerated notion of meritocracy, I emphasize that structural racism, rather than just individual acts, facilitates collective advantages, especially for White males. Hence, it is morally fitting to frame racial justice in employment, not only in terms of perfect equality, but also in terms of justly sharing an imbalance that cannot be corrected without counterbalance. The “shared inequity” lens offers a more realistic and just approach to pursuing racial justice in the workplace.

Reflecting current debates on ‘organizational virtues’ as going beyond the capitalocentrist bias of contemporary economies and to see diversity as ‘ethical responsibility,’ this article explores ‘ethical organizing’ at the intersection of alternative organizations and diversity. Our interest in a diversity-oriented analysis of alternative organizations stems from the assumption that those which question taken-for-granted notions of existing economies and follow alternative values of autonomy, solidarity, and responsibility might also be likely to challenge existing diversity relations and, thus, potentially open up new avenues for ethical organizing. Discussing our findings in terms of Lewis and Simpson’s (in)visibility vortex, our study shows that even though organizations position themselves discursively as ‘alternative,’ this positioning is not related to diversity issues. We conclude that a shift is needed to fully constitute ethical organizing, namely the establishment of a strong connection between alternative organizations’ virtues with, e.g., the feminist, anti-racist, queer, and disability rights movements.

At a time when firms signal their commitment to CSR through online communication, news sources may convey conflicting information, causing stakeholders to perceive firm hypocrisy. Here, we test the effects of conflicting CSR information that conveys inconsistent outcomes (results-based hypocrisy) and ulterior motives (motive-based hypocrisy) on hypocrisy perceptions expressed in social media posts, which we conceptualize as countersignals that reach a broad audience of stakeholders. Across six studies, we find that (1) conflicting CSR information from internal (firm) and external (news) sources elicits hypocrisy perceptions regardless of whether the CSR information reflects inconsistencies in results or motives, (2) individuals respond to conflicting CSR information with countersignals accusing firms of hypocrisy expressed in social media posts, (3) hypocrisy perceptions are linked to other damaging stakeholder consequences, including behavior (divestment, boycotting, lower employment interest), affect (moral outrage), and cognition (moral condemnation), and (4) firms with higher credibility are more likely to experience adverse effects of conflicting CSR information. These findings advance theory regarding the effects of conflicting CSR information as it relates to the role of credibility and different forms of hypocrisy. Importantly, damaging social media posts and stakeholder backlash can arise from hypocrisy perceptions associated with inconsistent CSR results as well as inconsistent motives, and strong firm credibility only makes a firm more vulnerable to this backlash.

This article explores anti-racist education in business schools amidst the backlash against critical race theory in an anti-Black world. I conduct an autoethnography of my experiences as a woman of colour and management educator who has attempted to bring critical discussions of race and racism into my classrooms. The article examines the barriers to anti-racist teaching in business schools and shows how they interweave individual/interpersonal, institutional, and ideological domains of power. Through my stories, I offer an account of the ways anti-racist education may be limited when it relies on the efforts of individual academics and reveal the tolls that anti-racist education can take on the educator, especially when they are navigating wider systems that are hostile to racial justice. By interrogating the challenges of anti-racist education, I also reflect on the practices and conditions that make meaningful anti-racist education possible.

Workplace unethical behavior poses a significant challenge for organizations, thus highlighting the importance of examining the intervention strategies used to manage such behaviors. In recent years, mindfulness has gained traction as a promising way of curbing workplace unethical behavior, receiving interest from business ethics scholars. Regrettably, prior research on mindfulness and workplace unethical behavior has predominantly focused on the potential benefits of mindfulness with regard to the reasoning process underlying ethical decision-making, overlooking the intuitive process. Drawing on the dual-system theory of ethical decision-making, this study develops a dual-process model to examine the role of mindfulness in reducing unethical behavior. Based on two-wave data collected from 357 employees, our findings demonstrate that mindfulness mitigates both moral disengagement and emotional exhaustion, resulting in a reduction in workplace unethical behavior. Moreover, moral identity serves as a boundary condition for the effects of mindfulness on ethical decision-making. In particular, mindfulness significantly decreases moral disengagement and consequently curtails workplace unethical behavior predominantly among individuals with low moral identity. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings as well as potential avenues for future research are discussed.