Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. A Responsibility to Whom? Populism and Its Effects on Corporate Social Responsibility.Christopher A. Hartwell & Timothy M. Devinney - 2024 - Business and Society 63 (2):300-340.
    Although populism is an ideologically fluid political vehicle, it is not one that is intrinsically anti-business. Indeed, different varieties of populist parties may encourage business activity for utilitarian ends, but with their own ideas on what businesses should be doing. This reality implies that initiatives not related to national greatness or priorities as defined by the populist leadership may be viewed as redundant. Key among such initiatives would be corporate social responsibility (CSR). In a populist environment, it is possible that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Addressing Governance Gaps in Global Value Chains: Introducing a Systematic Typology.Stephanie Schrage & Dirk Ulrich Gilbert - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics 170 (4):657-672.
    Multinational enterprises dominate the governance of global value chains, such that according to the concept of political corporate social responsibility, they are responsible to address governance gaps throughout the chains, even at the level of their independent suppliers. In practice, MNEs often struggle to cope with the complexity of these governance gaps, and PCSR does not provide a clear definition nor offer guidance for how to analyze and address them. By adopting the notion of governance mechanisms from GVC literature, this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Signposts or Weathervanes? The Curious Case of Corporate Social Responsibility and Conflict Minerals.Ozlem Arikan, Juliane Reinecke, Crawford Spence & Kevin Morrell - 2017 - Journal of Business Ethics 146 (3):469-484.
    Corporate social responsibility is often framed in terms of opposing constructions of the firm. These reflect, respectively, different accounts of its obligations: either to shareholders or to stakeholders. Although these opposing constructions of corporate responsibility are diametrically opposed, they are also much more fluid and mobile in certain contexts, since they can act as discursive resources that are deployed and brought into play in the struggle over shaping what responsibility means. They are less the fixed, ideological “signposts” they might appear, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Contextualizing Corporate Political Responsibilities: Neoliberal CSR in Historical Perspective.Marie-Laure Djelic & Helen Etchanchu - 2017 - Journal of Business Ethics 142 (4):641-661.
    This article provides a historical contextualization of Corporate Social Responsibility and its political role. CSR, we propose, is one form of business–society interactions reflecting a unique ideological framing. To make that argument, we compare contemporary CSR with two historical ideal-types. We explore in turn paternalism in nineteenth century Europe and managerial trusteeship in early twentieth century US. We outline how the political responsibilities of business were constructed, negotiated, and practiced in both cases. This historical contextualization shows that the frontier between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • How to Overcome Structural Injustice? Social Connectedness and the Tenet of Subsidiarity.Michael S. Aßländer - 2020 - Journal of Business Ethics 162 (3):719-732.
    Referring to the phenomenon of structural injustice resulting from unintended consequences of the combination of the actions of many people, Iris Marion Young claims for a new understanding of responsibility. She proposes what she calls a social connection model of responsibility which assigns responsibility to individuals also for participating in ongoing structural and social processes. To remedy structural injustice Young claims for collective action of various actors in society and assigns different degrees of responsibility depending on the agent’s position within (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Conflict Minerals and Supply Chain Due Diligence: An Exploratory Study of Multi-tier Supply Chains.Hannes Hofmann, Martin C. Schleper & Constantin Blome - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 147 (1):115-141.
    As recently stakeholders complain about the use of conflict minerals in consumer products that are often invisible to them in final products, firms across industries implement conflict mineral management practices. Conflict minerals are those, whose systemic exploitation and trade contribute to human right violations in the country of extraction and surrounding areas. Particularly, supply chain managers in the Western world are challenged taking reasonable steps to identify and prevent risks associated with these resources due to the globally dispersed nature of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Young’s Social Connection Model and Corporate Responsibility.Robert Phillips & Judith Schrempf-Stirling - 2022 - Philosophy of Management 21 (3):315-336.
    Recent structural innovations in global commerce present difficult challenges for legacy understandings of responsibility. The rise of outsourcing, sub-contracting, and mobile app-based platforms have dramatically restructured relationships between and among economic actors. Though not entirely new, the remarkable rise in the prevalence of these “not-quite-arm’s-length” relationships present difficulties for conceptions of responsibility based on interrogating the past for specifiable actions by blameworthy actors. Iris Marion Young invites investigation of a “social connection model of responsibility” (SCMR) that is, in many ways, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • A Deliberative Case for Democracy in Firms.Andrea Felicetti - 2018 - Journal of Business Ethics 150 (3):803-814.
    The increasing centrality of business firms in contemporary societies calls for a renewed attention to the democratization of these actors. This paper sheds new light on the possibility of democratizing business firms by bridging recent scholarship in two fields—deliberative democracy and business ethics. To date, deliberative democracy has largely neglected the role of business firms in democratic societies. While business ethics scholarship has given more attention to these issues, it has overlooked the possibility of deliberation within firms. As argued in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations