Understanding the Separation Thesis: Precision after the Decimal Point?: A Response to Joakim Sandberg

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Wempe
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Decimal Point ◽  
Separation Thesis

Sandberg documents with admirable precision nine rather diverging renderings of Freeman’s call for the rejection of the separation thesis (ST). A more careful consideration of the propriety of importing phrases such as “the rejection of ST” from more established academic disciplines so as to serve in the field of normative business ethics would seem to make that precision premature and maybe even superfluous. This may well be generalized to an observation concerning current working methods in normative business ethics.

It’s Time for Empirical Research in Business Ethics

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 233-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larue Tone Hosmer
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Field Of Study ◽  
Belief Structure ◽  
Do So ◽  
The Way

Abstract:We have a very decent belief structure or general paradigm underlying Business Ethics as a formal field of study. It has an explicit moral base. It can be stated in simple and direct terms. It has been developed over a number of recent years by a group of respected scholars from a variety of academic disciplines. It is, however, subject to multiple interpretations and open to extensive conflicts. We can easily tolerate if not benefit from the differing interpretations. We must—at some point—moderate if not resolve the debilitating conflicts. The argument I wish to make in this paper is that we have reached that point. It is time to resolve the conflicts, and the way to do so is to generate awkward, undeniable facts through basic empirical research. Those facts will then have to be incorporated into acceptable—and eventually accepted—theory.

The Impossibility of the Separation Thesis: A Response to Joakim Sandberg

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jared D. Harris ◽  
R. Edward Freeman
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Ethical Values ◽  
Separation Thesis ◽  
Second Order Effects ◽  
The Way

Distinguishing “business” concerns from “ethical” values is not only an unfruitful and meaningless task, it is also an impossible endeavor. Nevertheless, fruitless attempts to separate facts from values produce detrimental second-order effects, both for theory and practice, and should therefore be abandoned. We highlight examples of exemplary research that integrate economic and moral considerations, and point the way to a business ethics discipline that breaks new ground by putting ideas and narratives about business together with ideas and narratives about ethics.

Understanding the Separation Thesis

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joakim Sandberg
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Separation Thesis

Many writers in the field of business ethics seem to have accepted R. Edward Freeman’s argument to the effect that what he calls “the separation thesis,” or the idea that business and morality can be separated in certain ways, should be rejected. In this paper, I discuss how this argument should be understood more exactly, and what position “the separation thesis” refers to. I suggest that there are actually many interpretations (or versions) of the separation thesis going around, ranging from semantic, empirical and reformative to some which are straightforwardly normative. While it is generally agreed that the separation thesis should be rejected, then, there is not as much agreement on what this thesis actually says. I suggest that whether or not we should reject the separation thesis, however, ultimately must depend on how we understand it more exactly—on certain interpretations, the thesis comes out as more or less trivially false, but we should demand more evidence or argument to reject it on certain other interpretations. This result presents a challenge for all those writers who are committed to the rejection of the separation thesis.

The Tide is Turning on the Separation Thesis?: A Response to Commentators

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 561-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joakim Sandberg
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Separation Thesis ◽  
Original Argument

In my article “Understanding the Separation Thesis” I noted that most scholars in the business ethics field seemed to have accepted R. Edward Freeman’s argument to the effect that what he calls “the separation thesis” should be rejected. I argue, however, that they seemed to understand this thesis (and its rejection) in quite different ways. This volume contains three responses to my article which, interestingly enough, can be taken to corroborate my original argument. I here make some brief comments on these responses.

Do They See the Point?

1958 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 271-272
Author(s):  
Peter L. Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Visual Sensitivity ◽  
The Other ◽  
Decimal Point ◽  
The One

DO THEY See the Point? This question has a dual meaning. “The Point” refers both to the actual dot, i.e. the decimal point, and to the “point” or meaning of the expression wherein the decimal point is used. Likewise two forms of seeing are implied. The one has to do with the adequacy of the sense of sight. The other is concerned with ideological understanding and judgments of significance, i.e., insight. The one refers to visual sensitivity. The other to conceptual sensibility. Both are important and worthy of careful consideration.

The Business Ethics Movement; Where are We Headed and What Can We Learn From Our Colleagues in Bioethics?

1995 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 603-620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Wicks
Keyword(s):  
Social Movements ◽  
Business Ethics ◽  
Interdisciplinary Research ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Ethical Thought ◽  
Considerable Potential ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ancient Times ◽  
Constructive Interaction

Abstract:There is a long and distinguished history of ethical thought in both business and medicine dating back to ancient times. Yet, the emergence of distinct academic disciplines [“business ethics” and “bioethics”] which are also tied to broader social movements is a very recent phenomenon. In spite of the apparent affinities that would seem to emerge from this connection, many have argued that the differences between business and medicine make any constructive interaction between business ethics and bioethics minimal. Indeed, little has been done to specifically examine the potential for collaboration and interdisciplinary research. This paper argues that there is considerable potential for constructive interaction between these two movements based on three major arguments: that the differences between medicine and business have been exaggerated, that both fields face a number of urgent problems that are common to each, and that the model of bioethics can serve as a useful guide for business ethicists.

The Effect of Age and Size on Reputation of Business Ethics Journals

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (7) ◽  
pp. 1465-1480
Author(s):  
E. Susanna Cahn ◽  
Victor Glass
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Citation Rate ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Journal Ranking ◽  
Journal Quality ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Academic Rewards ◽  
School Ratings ◽  
Journal Visibility ◽  
Effect Of Age

Business ethics journals have appeared on a few ranked lists that are specific to this niche discipline. As with more traditional academic disciplines, these rankings are used for academic rewards such as faculty tenure and promotion, along with department and school ratings. Journal ranking has been subject to considerable criticism even as its administrative use persists. Among the criticisms are that journal quality is a poor proxy for article quality, citation rate is an imperfect reflection of article influence, and bias may be introduced into rankings by visibility characteristics such as journal age, size, circulation, and experience of the rater with a journal. This research note studies the effect of journal age and size on the rankings of business ethics journals compiled by Beets, Lewis, and Brower, by Albrecht, Thompson, Hoopes, and Rodrigo, and by Serenko and Bontis. Significant correlation was found for journal age with the administratively derived Beets et al. ranking. No significant correlation was found for size in any ranking study. Results were not significant for the Albrecht et al. and the Serenko and Bontis rankings representing the perspectives from surveys of active researchers or citation analysis. Perhaps sometimes a journal’s reputation precedes it, as perception of journal quality may be biased by journal visibility, either because it has been published and available for a number of years, or because it is well known and likely to be cited.

scholarly journals Responsible management education in Egyptian public business schools

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 681-696
Author(s):  
Mohamed Mousa ◽  
Hala A. Abdelgaffar ◽  
Rami M. Ayoubi
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Business Ethics ◽  
Management Education ◽  
Business Schools ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Content Type ◽  
General Acceptance ◽  
Responsible Management ◽  
Global Responsibility

Purpose Out of 24 public business schools in Egypt, the purpose of this paper is to focus on three in order to investigate how responsible management education is perceived and exercised by academics there. Design/methodology/approach A total of 168 academics were contacted and interviewed in 42 focus groups. The length of each focus group was about 45 min, and all of them were conducted in Arabic because the majority of respondents are not fluent in English. The authors used thematic analysis to determine the main ideas in the transcripts. Findings Based on data analysis of the perceptions of academics concerning business education, research and management process at the target business schools, the authors of this paper found that responsible management education is not considered a priority in the work agendas of the Egyptian public business schools. Furthermore, the authors believe that besides issues with the general acceptance of the need for responsible management education, there are functional, procedural and edu-academic barriers that these schools need to overcome first before proceeding with implementation and expecting positive outcomes. Research limitations/implications This research maybe subject to criticism because the authors address only the perspectives of academics in the chosen business schools while neglecting other academic partners, particularly those in managerial positions, such as rectors and heads of departments. Future researchers may use the same research questions to investigate a managerial level perspective to depict a more holistic picture of the situation. Moreover, including Egyptian private business schools may also enrich the findings. In fact, the authors suggest that scholars from different academic disciplines such as sustainability management, business ethics, higher education, sustainability and cultural diversity work together to produce more interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary research on the global responsibility themes business schools have to manage. Originality/value This paper contributes by filling a gap in sustainability, HR management, business ethics and higher education literature in which empirical studies on responsible management education and the responsible practices of academics have been limited so far.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document