Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Displaying: 1-7 of 7 documents


1. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 7
John Hasnas The Principles Approach is a Big Tent Approach
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In his Commentary on my Principles Approach, Gregory Wolcott (2014) worries that the approach leaves no room for ethical theory and decries the tendency of business school faculty to derive ethical conclusions from legal standards. However, the Principles Approach is, by design, open to supplementation by ethical theory and has the virtue of providing a basis for making ethical assessments of legal standards.
2. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 6
Gregory Wolcott Business Ethics and Ideals
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
John Hasnas (2013) argues for a “Principles Approach” to supplant normative theory and casuistry in business ethics pedagogy. This Commentary argues some normative theory ought still to have some place in business ethics education and that the problems Hasnas sees in business ethics pedagogy only tell half the story.
3. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 5
Gregory R. Beabout Once More On Re-Conceiving Management as a Domain-Relative Practice: A Response to Sinnicks
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Matthew Sinnicks has attempted to cast doubt on my efforts to extend MacIntyre’s virtue ethics with regard to re-conceiving management as a domain-relative practice. However, rather than weakening my argument, his objections provide an opportunity to clarify a key distinction, address several misunderstandings, respond to criticisms, rectify misrepresentations, and show again that MacIntyre’s virtue ethics provides a fertile framework for re-casting issues of management and business ethics, including a transformed understanding of management as a domainrelative practice.
4. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 4
Wayne Norman Is There ‘a Point’ to Markets? A Response to Martin
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Dominic Martin attributes to me and other adherents of the market-failures approach to business ethics a narrow account of justification, focused solely on economic efficiency. On the contrary, I argue the appeal to efficiency and market failure is best seen as a pragmatic, Rawlsian, strategy to find common ground and a shared vocabulary for business ethicists who have long been Balkanized by overly ideological “theories.” So understood, the market-failures approach is not the reductivist program Martin portrays it to be. Efficiency and the taming of market failures should be seen as one of many grounds (albeit usually the most important) for both regulatory and beyond-compliance norms for business in a capitalist democracy.
5. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 3
Daryl Koehn Kantian Virtue Ethics in the Context of Business: How Practically Useful Can It Be?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Claus Dierksmeier admirably combats the misperception that Kant is a deontologist with no regard for virtue. Dierksmeier contends Kant offers a theory of virtue that can contribute in significant ways to advancing the analysis of, e.g., stakeholder theory and internal compliance programs. His plea that business ethicists should view Kant as a resource for thinking more widely and deeply about virtue seems eminently sensible. However, there are grounds for questioning whether a Kantian approach will be of much help in thinking through the ethics of real world business practices.
6. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 2
Matthew Sinnicks Mastery of One’s Domain Is Not the Essence of Management
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
I attempt to cast doubt on Beabout’s attempt to build on MacIntyre’s ethical theory by accounting for management as a ‘domain-relative’ practice for three reasons: i) we can partially engage in practices, so if management can be accounted a practice there is no need to invoke domain-relativity; ii) management does not seem to be domain-relative in the same way that other examples of domain-relative practices might be; and iii) practical wisdom, which Beabout sees as key to management as a domain-relative practice, is adequately covered by MacIntyre’s account of politics.
7. Business Ethics Journal Review: Volume > 2 > Issue: 1
Marc A. Cohen Empathy in Business Ethics Education Redux
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
My original paper (Cohen 2012) argued that business ethics education should focus on cultivating empathetic concern. This response clarifies terminology used in that paper and responds to criticisms presented by David Ohreen (2013).