Business ethics, stakeholder theory, and the ethics of healthcare organizations

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 169-181

  Werhane, Patricia H ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034147299     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0963180100902044     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
2. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
3. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
4. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
5. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
6. 1. There is an enormous literature on this subject. See, for example, Donaldson T 1982; French P. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 1979;16:207-15; Keeley M. A Social-Contract Theory of Organizations. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1988; Ladd J. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 1970;54:488-516; May L. The Morality of Groups. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame University Press, 1987; Velasquez M. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 1982;2:1-18; Werhane PH. Persons, Rights, and Corporations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985.
7. 2. Friedman M. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine 1970;Sept. 1:122-26.
8. 3. Gert B. Rationality, human nature, and lists. Ethics 1990;100:279-300.
9. 4. Hausman DM, McPherson MS. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Sen A. On Ethics and Economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987.
10. 4. Hausman DM, McPherson MS. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Sen A. On Ethics and Economics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987.
11. 5. This distinction is illuminatingly discussed in Adam Smith. See Smith A. Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. Macfie AL, Raphael DD. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1976: Parts I, II. Although the model of a constrained rational egoist is often attributed to Smith, that is simply untrue. He is not an egoist, nor does he place emphasis on the autonomous individual moral decisionmaker; he acknowledges the intrinsically social nature of human beings. See Theory of Moral Sentiments, II.ii.3.1.
12. 5. This distinction is illuminatingly discussed in Adam Smith. See Smith A. Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. Macfie AL, Raphael DD. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1976: Parts I, II. Although the model of a constrained rational egoist is often attributed to Smith, that is simply untrue. He is not an egoist, nor does he place emphasis on the autonomous individual moral decisionmaker; he acknowledges the intrinsically social nature of human beings. See Theory of Moral Sentiments, II.ii.3.1.
13. 6. Smith WK, Tedlow RS. James Burke: a career in American business. Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration Case No. 9-389-177. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1989.
14. 7. Collins JC, Porras JI. Built to Last. New York: HarperBusiness, 1994:2.
15. 8. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:3.
16. 9. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:68.
17. 10. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:4-5.
18. 11. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:282.
19. 12. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:5.
20. 13. See note 7, Collins, Porras 1994:8.
21. 14. Freeman RE. Stakeholder theory and the modern corporation. Reprinted in: Donaldson T, Werhane PH, eds. Ethical Issues in Business, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1999:247-57.
22. 15. Donaldson T, Preston L. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review 1995;20:65-91.
23. 16. Mitchell RK, Agle B, Wood D. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 1997;22:853-86.
24. 17. Etzioni A. Modern Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964:59.
25. 18. See note 15, Donaldson, Preston 1995:74.
26. 19. Evans W, Freeman RE. A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In: Beauchamp T, Bowie N, eds. Ethical Theory and Business, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1988:104.
27. 20. See note 14, Freeman 1999:250.
28. 21. Phillips R. Normative stakeholder theory: toward a conception of stakeholder legitimacy. Forthcoming.
29. 22. An HCO has different obligations to a healthcare professional who is hired to clean rooms than it does to a healthcare professional who is hired as a professional. In the former case the obligations are to the person as a moral agent and as an employee, not as a professional.
30. 23. Phillips R. Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly 1997;7:51-66; original emphasis deleted.
31. 24. Luben D. Lawyers and Justice. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1988.
32. 25. Emanuel EJ, Emanuel LL. What is accountability in health care? Annals of Internal Medicine 1996;124:229-39.