Business Ethics Quarterly: Stakeholder Theory, Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility & Family Enterprise

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 594-596
Author(s):  
Bradley R. Agle ◽  
James J. Chrisman ◽  
Ronald K. Mitchell ◽  
Laura J. Spence
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. Omran ◽  
Dineshwar Ramdhony

This study provides an extensive critical review of the theoretical perspectives applied on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure literature. From a CSR standpoint we review and discuss, in detail, legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory, social contract theory, and signalling theory to identify the situations that suit each of these perspectives. The findings show that there is no universal theory applicable on corporate social responsibility disclosure for all situations or societies. While legitimacy theory suggests CSR disclosures are part of a process of legitimation, stakeholder theory offers an explanation of CSR accountability to stakeholders. Legitimacy theory seems to be more suitable for organizations working in developed countries, on the other hand, stakeholder theory appears to be most suitable for organizations working in developing countries; where a corporation can manage its stakeholders and the pressure to comply with existing legislation is less as compared to the developed countries. Social contract theory is appropriate for developed/emerged economies, as CSR disclosure exists due to an implicit social contract between business and society, which implies some indirect obligations of business towards society. Signalling theory will suit a situation where firms are competing for resources. A firm willing to demarcate from other firms will engage in more CSR practices. It is also important that the signal reaches the target audience by reporting on CSR. 


2021 ◽  
pp. 81-98
Author(s):  
Jason Brennan ◽  
William English ◽  
John Hasnas ◽  
Peter Jaworski

Moral confusion in business ethics and corporate social responsibility often stems from treating ethics and law as if they were the same. Ethics and the law often overlap and sometimes conflict. They are distinct categories. Laws may enforce people’s ethical obligations. But they may also contravene them and require unethical action. Because the law has no independent moral authority, business people are always required to ask themselves whether compliance with the law is the right course of action. When the law prescribes oppressive or unjust conduct, they may have an ethical duty not to obey the law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document