The narrow application of rawls in business ethics: a political conception of both stakeholder theory and the morality of markets
Main Article Content
Keywords
Rawls, Stakeholder theory (normative foundations), Social contract theory, Moral markets approach, Organizational ethics
Abstract
This paper argues that Rawls’ principles of justice provide a normative foundation for stakeholder theory. The principles articulate (at an abstract level) citizens’ rights; these rights create interests across all aspects of society, including in the space of economic activity; and therefore, stakeholders –as citizens– have legitimate interests in the space of economic activity. Rawls work therefore presses us to ground questions of business ethics in political philosophy: stakeholder rights and interests (which are citizens’ rights and interests in the economic context) are protected at the institutional level and are not to be determined by managers or corporations.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Bishop, J. D., 2008, “For-Profit Corporations in a Just Society”, en: Busi-ness Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 191-212.
Boatright, J. R., 1999, “Does Business Ethics Rest on a Mistake?”, en: Bu-siness Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 583-591.
Child, J. W. – Marcoux, A. M., 1999, “Freeman and Evan: Stakeholder Theory in the Original Position”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 207-223.
Cohen, G. A., 2000, If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich?Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Daniels, N., 2003, “Democratic Equality: Rawl’s Complex Egalitarianism”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Doane, D., 2005, “The Myth of CSR: The Problem with Assuming the Companies Can Do Well While also Doing Good is that Markets Don’t Really Work that Way”, en: Stanford Social Innovation Review (Fall issue), pp. 22-29.
Donaldson, T. – Dunfee, T. W., 1999, Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Donaldson, T. – Preston, L. E., 1995, “The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications”, en: Academy of Ma-nagement Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 65-91.
Dreben, B., 2003, “On Rawls and Political Liberalism”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.
Freeman, R. E., 1994, “The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 409-421.
Freeman, S., 2003, “Introduction”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, S., 2007, Rawls. Nueva York: Routledge.
Freeman, R. E. – Harrison, J. S. – Wicks, A. C., 2007, Managing for Stake-holders: Survival, Reputation and Success. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Friedman, M., 1970, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”, en: The New York Times Magazine.
Hartman, E. M., 2001, “Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy, and Or-ganizational Ethics: A Reply to Phillips and Margolis”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 673-685.
Hsieh, N., 2005, “Rawlsian Justice and Workplace Republicanism”, en: Social Theory and Practice, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 115-137.
Marens, R., 2007, “Returning to Rawls: Social Contracting, Social Justice, and Transcending the Limitations of Locke”, en: The Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 75, No. 1, pp. 63-76.
Phillips, R., 2003, Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics. San Fran-cisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Phillips, R. A. – Margolis, J. D., 1999, “Toward and Ethics of Organiza-tions”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 619-638.
Rawls, J., 1993, Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. Nueva York: Colum-bia University Press.
Rawls, J., 1999a, A Theory of Justice, edición revisada, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J., 1999b, The Law of Peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J., 2001, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambrige: Harvard Uni-versity Press.
Reich, R. B., 2008, Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Demo-cracy, and Everyday Life. Nueva York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Smith, J. D., 2005, “Moral Markets and Moral Managers Revisited”, en: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 6, pp. 129-141.
Sollars, G., 2002, “The Corporation as Actual Agreement”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 351-370.
Boatright, J. R., 1999, “Does Business Ethics Rest on a Mistake?”, en: Bu-siness Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 583-591.
Child, J. W. – Marcoux, A. M., 1999, “Freeman and Evan: Stakeholder Theory in the Original Position”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 207-223.
Cohen, G. A., 2000, If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich?Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Daniels, N., 2003, “Democratic Equality: Rawl’s Complex Egalitarianism”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Doane, D., 2005, “The Myth of CSR: The Problem with Assuming the Companies Can Do Well While also Doing Good is that Markets Don’t Really Work that Way”, en: Stanford Social Innovation Review (Fall issue), pp. 22-29.
Donaldson, T. – Dunfee, T. W., 1999, Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Donaldson, T. – Preston, L. E., 1995, “The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications”, en: Academy of Ma-nagement Review, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 65-91.
Dreben, B., 2003, “On Rawls and Political Liberalism”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.
Freeman, R. E., 1994, “The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 409-421.
Freeman, S., 2003, “Introduction”, en: S. Freeman (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press.
Freeman, S., 2007, Rawls. Nueva York: Routledge.
Freeman, R. E. – Harrison, J. S. – Wicks, A. C., 2007, Managing for Stake-holders: Survival, Reputation and Success. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Friedman, M., 1970, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits”, en: The New York Times Magazine.
Hartman, E. M., 2001, “Moral Philosophy, Political Philosophy, and Or-ganizational Ethics: A Reply to Phillips and Margolis”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 673-685.
Hsieh, N., 2005, “Rawlsian Justice and Workplace Republicanism”, en: Social Theory and Practice, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 115-137.
Marens, R., 2007, “Returning to Rawls: Social Contracting, Social Justice, and Transcending the Limitations of Locke”, en: The Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 75, No. 1, pp. 63-76.
Phillips, R., 2003, Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics. San Fran-cisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Phillips, R. A. – Margolis, J. D., 1999, “Toward and Ethics of Organiza-tions”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 619-638.
Rawls, J., 1993, Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. Nueva York: Colum-bia University Press.
Rawls, J., 1999a, A Theory of Justice, edición revisada, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J., 1999b, The Law of Peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J., 2001, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambrige: Harvard Uni-versity Press.
Reich, R. B., 2008, Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business, Demo-cracy, and Everyday Life. Nueva York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Smith, J. D., 2005, “Moral Markets and Moral Managers Revisited”, en: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 6, pp. 129-141.
Sollars, G., 2002, “The Corporation as Actual Agreement”, en: Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 351-370.
Article Sidebar
Published
Jul 16, 2012
Article Details
How to Cite
Cohen, M. A. (2012). The narrow application of rawls in business ethics: a political conception of both stakeholder theory and the morality of markets. Co-Herencia, 9(16), 145–184. https://doi.org/10.17230/co-herencia.9.16.6
Issue
Section
Articles
Supporting Agencies
Author Biography
Marc A. Cohen, "Universidad de Pensilvania-Estados Unidos"
Doctor en Filosofía, Universidad de Pensilvania-Estados Unidos. Profesor asistente, Departamentode Gerencia y Departamento de Filosofía, Universidad de Seattle-Estados Unidos. Agradezco a John Dienhart, Maria Derdevandis y Jeff Helmreich por sus múltiples y útiles sugerencias, y por su estímulo.Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Avisos:
- No tiene que cumplir con la licencia para elementos del material de dominio público o cuando su uso esté permitido por una excepción o limitación aplicable .
- No se dan garantías. Es posible que la licencia no le otorgue todos los permisos necesarios para el uso previsto. Por ejemplo, otros derechos como la publicidad, la privacidad o los derechos morales pueden limitar la forma en que utiliza el material.
