The Ethical Issue Emphasis of Companies: Content,Patterning,and Influences

Abstract

The study investigates the content and form of attention paid to ethics issues by U.K. firms. It considers the extent to which ethical attention can be characterized in terms of broad domain groupings, corresponding to company concerns with stakeholder groups, stewardship responsibilities, intrinsic values, and the social order of the firm. Survey results from an industry-stratified sample of 299 U.K. firms indicate that attention to ethical issues is industry-specific and a function of factors in the firm's operating environment. Of particular importance seem to be perceptions of public interest in the ethical conduct of management and staff, and in the social and environmental consequences of products and services. Results also indicate how companies manifest their ethical interests in different ways, including expressed concern, internal and external communications, and new policy formulation. Patterns across these criteria suggest scope for deeper analysis of relationships between ethical strategy, rhetoric, and action.

Keywords

ethics social responsibility organizational objective stake-holders organizational communications

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ARGYRIS, C. , & SCHON, D. Theory in practice. San francisco: Jossey Bass , 1974.

BENEISH, M. D. , & CHATOV, R. Corporate codes of conduct: Economic determinants and legal implications for independent auditors . Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 1993, 12, 3-35 .

BRUNSSON, N. The organization of hypocrisy. Chichester: Wiley , 1989.

CARROLL, A. B. A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance . Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 497-505 .

CENTER FOR BUSINESS ETHICS . Are corporations institutionalizing ethics? Journal of Business Ethics, 1986, 5, 85-91 .

CENTER FOR BUSINESS ETHICS . Instilling ethical values in large corporations . Journal of Business Ethics, 1992, 11, 863-867 .

CLARKSON, M. B. E. Defining, evaluating, and managing corporate social performance: The stakeholder management model. In Research in corporate social performance and policy (Vol. 13), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press , 1991.

CHATOV, R. Danger signs of unethical behavior: How to determine if your firm is at ethical risk . Journal of Business Ethics, 1982, 10, 249-253 .

THE CONFERENCE BOARD . Corporate Ethics. Research Report No. 900, New York , 1987.

10.

THE CONFERENCE BOARD . Corporate Ethics Practices. Research Report No. 986, New York , 1992.

11.

EPSTEIN, E. M. Societal, managerial and legal perspectives on corporate social responsibility product process . The Hastings Law Journal, 1979, 30(5).

12.

ETHICS RESOURCE CENTER . Ethics policies and programs in American business. Washington, D.C. , 1990.

13.

FERRELL, O. C. , & SKINNER, S. J. , Ethical behavior and bureaucratic structure in marketing research organizations . Journal of Marketing Research, 1988, 25, 103-109 .

14.

FINNIS, J. Fundamentals of ethics. Oxford: Clarendon Press , 1983.

15.

HITE, R. E. , BELLIZZI, J. A. , & FRASER, C. A content analysis of ethical policy statements regarding marketing activities . Journal of Business Ethics, 1988, 7, 771-776 .

16.

LANGLOIS, C. C. , & SCHLEGELMILCH, B. B. Do corporate codes of ethics reflect national character? Evidence from Europe and the United States . Journal of International Business Studies, 1990, 21(4), 519-539 .

17.

NICHOLSON, N. Ethics in organizations: A framework for theory and research . Journal of Business Ethics, 1994, 13(8), 581-596 .

18.

RANDALL, D. M. , & GIBSON, A. M. Methodology in business ethics research: A review and critical assessment . Journal of Business Ethics, 1990, 9, 457-471 .

19.

ROBERTSON, D. C. Corporate ethics programs: The impact of firm size. In B. Harvey , H. J. L. Van Luijk , and G. Corbetta (Eds.), Market mortality and company size. North Holland: Kluwer Academic Publishers , 1991.

20.

ROBERTSON, D. C. , & NICHOLSON, N. Expressions of corporate social responsibility in U.K. firms . Journal of Business Ethics. In press.

21.

ROBERTSON, D. C. , & SCHLEGELMILCH, B. B. Corporate institutionalization of ethics in the United States and Great Britain . Journal of Business Ethics, 1993, 12, 301-312 .

22.

SCHLEGELMILCH, B. B. , & HOUSTON, J. E. Corporate codes of ethics in large UK companies: An empirical investigation of use, content and attitudes . European Journal of Marketing, 1989, 23(6), 7-24 .

23.

SETHI, S. P. A conceptual framework for environmental analysis of social issues and evaluation of business response patterns . Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 63-74 .

24.

SINGER, P. (Ed.) A companion to ethics. Oxford: Blackwell , 1991.

25.

WARTICK, S. L. , & COCHRAN, P. L. The evolution of the corporate social performance model . Academy of Management Review, 1985, 10, 758-769 .

26.

WEAVER, G. R. Corporate codes of ethics: Purpose, process and content issues . Business and Society, 1993, 32, 44-58 .

27.

WOOD, D. J. Corporate social performance revisited . Academy of Management Review, 1991, 4, 691-718 . (a)

28.

WOOD, D. J. Social issues in management: Theory and research in corporate social performance . Journal of Management, 1991, 17, 383-406 . (b)