Many individualist critics of collective moral responsibility attempt to show that only individuals can act and groups cannot make choices or possess desires and beliefs which it is claimed make group intentionality impossible. French's corporate decision structure is composed of two elements: 1 an organizational flow chart that delineates stations and levels within the corporation; and 2 rules that reveal how to recognize decisions that are corporate ones and not simply personal decisions of the humans who occupy the positions on the organizational flow chart. Indessen gilt es, so die Argumentation unseres Beitrages, die Bedeutung individueller Moral auch im Kontext der Wirt-schafts- und Unternehmensethik neu zu ueberdenken und ihr erneut einen systematischen Stellenwert zuzuweisen. This basic but critical distinction has implications for our expectations about the treatment various organizations should receive in moral, legal, and political contexts. While there is broad, often tacit, agreement regarding the basic model of moral responsibility as it applies to individuals; there is considerable debate about how this notion might be applied to groups and their members.
In this article I will look at the philosophy of individualism because it is within such a framework that the dominant theory of responsibility, namely, that of individual responsibility, has been constructed and is to be understood. May compares corporate action to the vicarious actions of a representative on behalf of his or her constituency's interests which are themselves the outcome of complex interactions and various relationships among the constituency's members. The key components of the basic notion of moral responsibility are deeply rooted in the fabric of every society and are constitutive of social life. The goals that guide corporate actions and give direction to the activities of its members are an inseparable admixture of overlapping individual goals. Group Liability with Contributory and Noncontributory Fault Feinberg's second collective responsibility arrangement uses a category rather than an actual or hypothetical social group to examine the moral implications of luck for a group of individuals sharing a common moral fault. Ladd's position on corporations and formal organizations generally, is based in the philosophy of language, which French employs to build a competing position supporting corporate moral responsibility.
These provide greater incentives for owners and business leaders to encourage employees to discuss the reflexive nature of legal and moral responsibility in business, facilitate workers to voice their moral concerns, and create structures and processes that allow those concerns to be heard. I shall argue that an adequate theory of responsibility is needed, which does not only take into account individual responsibility, but also collective and corporate responsibility, capable of taking into consideration society and its problems. Since the collapse of real socialism as an alternative in the period 1989—1991, it has become increasingly difficult to have this discussion. The ascription of moral responsibility requires that an act causing harm occurred. Teemu Ruskola, Professor of Law at Emory Law, noted how treatment of the question of moral responsibility of firms is coloured by cultural differences in theories of the firm, distinguishing between Western liberal views, state socialism, and Chinese Confucianism.
Hire long term workers instead of temporary ones B. Ladd does believe that bureaucracies, i. Virginia Held 1986 recognizes the validity of collective moral responsibility, but thinks different criteria for corporate and personal responsibility are appropriate and should be developed. One innovation in this area, the speech-enabled business system, is characterised by complex implementations that bring together language processing technologies, applications development, and end-user psychology. The theory is an alternative to the methodological individualist's interpretation of corporations as merely contractual relations between human moral agents with no moral status of their own. Held concludes that the random collective is morally responsible for failing to organize themselves to develop a method for deciding to act.
Even the decisions that are made for the good of the company are made because having the company thrive is beneficial to themselves. After reading the , I thought I would have a better understanding of a corporation from an ethical standpoint. Consequently, it needs to be recognised and openly debated not to discredit any research paradigm but to enable growth and maturity. Bad luck didn't reach out and bring about the accident for which the driver now bears responsibility. She rejected French's earlier position on corporate metaphysical personhood.
Working well with strangers may be a social skill, but it is not a moral trait. He was the editor of the Journal of Social Philosophy for 16 years 1988-2005 and general editor of the seven volume Issues in Contemporary Ethics series in the 1970s. In Ladd's analysis, moral language can be incorporated into a group's operating procedures. I added a piece that works towards greater information literacy. A corporation is capable of carrying through on its plans or on its goal-directed decisions. On a more pragmatic level, she also highlighted the messiness of organisational decision-making, questioning the simplistic model of controlling individual decision-makers in organisations and noting the distributive decision-making often found in organisational contexts.
Making the case for corporate moral responsibility The first set of speakers we gathered were all proponents of corporate moral agency, but they approach the problem in different ways. Risser argues that organizations do not have moral rights, and the legal rights they do have serve ideally to protect human interests. For more than two decades, Peter French has been arguing in books, articles and symposia that corporations are genuine actors in the moral universe. Conglomerates have internal structures, such as procedures for making decisions and for accepting new members. Ultimately, what is at stake is the very nature and concept of organizations as entities different from the aggregation of their individual members. The ontological and moral status of collective entities has been the object of an enduring debate in philosophy, social sciences, law and applied ethics. Using the metaphor invaders throughout the book, French argues not only that corporations are moral agents, but also that their moral agency has made the business world of the late twentieth century and of the coming century different from anything of preceding epochs.
Ausgangspunkt der vorliegenden Argumentation ist die Feststellung, dass ökonomische Theorien mit der Betonung individueller Freiheit eine grundlegende Wertung vornehmen. Michael Zimmerman 1985 also believes there is no finite amount of responsibility in cases of group wrongdoing, but disagrees that moral responsibility should be ascribed on the basis of a member's contribution to the harm or injury caused. An aggregate collective is a loose collection of people. After having mapped the main theories on responsibilities in organizations using the logic of gift, the article will propose an evolutionary path to develop existing or new theories according to this approach. Corporate moral agency is not necessary to punish individual wrongdoers within an organisation, to require an organisation to make restitution for the wrongdoing of its employees, to subject an organisation to administrative regulation, or to criticise an organisation.
In this context, ascriptions of responsibility and judgments of blame are usually triggered by harm caused to one person by another. Uehling , University of Minnesota Press, 1978. It is duly suggested that the notion of 'corporate moral agency' might be thought of in future as epistemological organizing principle, rather than a political battleground or solvable puzzle. Widespread harms for which organizations are responsible are frequent occurrences. Corporations speak qua corporate entities and the political speech of individuals is already protected. Without some conception of moral responsibility no amount of imaginative insight will render a society recognizable as a human society. Hodgson argued in favour of accepting collective intentionality on the grounds that a firm is greater than the individuals who make it up.