BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL最新文献_第6页

Opportunity or Opportunism?: An Examination of International Recruitment via Employer and Nation Branding Strategies 机遇还是机会主义？：从雇主和国家品牌战略看国际招聘

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-05-03 DOI: 10.5840/BPEJ201742655

Thomas G. Pittz, P. Benson, Melissa Intindola, Manos Kalargiros

引用次数: 4

Reconciling Ethical Theory and Practice: Toward Developing a Business Ethics Pedagogical Model 伦理理论与实践的协调：构建商业伦理教育模式

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-02-08 DOI: 10.5840/bpej2016113046

Patricia Grant, Surendra Arjoon, P. McGhee

引用次数: 1

Consumers' Concerns with How They Are Researched Online 消费者对他们如何在网上被搜索的关注

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-02-08 DOI: 10.5840/BPEJ2016122853

Caroline Moraes

引用次数: 2

Ethics in the Eye of the Beholder: A Pluralist View of Fair Trade 行为人眼中的伦理：一种多元的公平贸易观

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-02-08 DOI: 10.5840/bpej201692644

J. Everett, D. Neu, A. Rahaman

引用次数: 0

Attitudes Toward Employee Rights Among the States: Why Vermont Is Not Like Mississippi 各州对雇员权利的态度:为什么佛蒙特州不像密西西比州

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-02-08 DOI: 10.5840/BPEJ201692243

M. Mentzer

引用次数: 0

Workplace Bullying among Public Sector Employees: Reflections upon Organizational Justice Perceptions and Organizational Citizenship Behavior 公共部门雇员的职场欺凌:对组织公正感知和组织公民行为的反思

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2017-01-20 DOI: 10.5840/BPEJ2016122752

Deniz Öztürk, Semra F. Aşcigil

引用次数: 5

Shareholders vs. Stakeholders: How Liberal and Libertarian Political Philosophy Frames the Basic Debate in Business Ethics 股东与利益相关者:自由主义和自由意志主义政治哲学如何构成商业伦理的基本辩论

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2013-10-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1975752

David Rönnegard, N. Smith

{"title":"Shareholders vs. Stakeholders: How Liberal and Libertarian Political Philosophy Frames the Basic Debate in Business Ethics","authors":"David Rönnegard, N. Smith","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1975752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1975752","url":null,"abstract":"The 'basic debate' in business ethics between shareholder and stakeholder theory has underlined the field since its inception, with wide ranging normative, descriptive, and instrumental arguments offered on both sides. We maintain that insofar as this is primarily a normative debate, clarity can be brought by elucidating how it is framed by the political philosophies of liberalism and libertarianism. With liberalism represented by John Rawls’ theory of justice and libertarianism represented by the ideas of Milton Friedman and Robert Nozick, and (separately) Edward Freeman, the paper shows that both liberalism and libertarianism can be interpreted to justify shareholder and stakeholder theory respectively. The debate between shareholder theory and stakeholder theory is framed by liberal and libertarian justifications that hinge primarily on whether and to what extent one should have exogenous or endogenous safeguards on corporate behavior. Accordingly, political philosophy turns out to be highly relevant to both business ethics and corporate governance, not because the corporation resembles the state, but because of the potential safeguards placed on the corporation by the state.","PeriodicalId":53983,"journal":{"name":"BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL","volume":"32 1","pages":"183-220"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67823111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 8

The (honest) truth about dishonesty : how we lie to everyone--especially ourselves 关于不诚实的(诚实的)真相:我们如何对每个人——尤其是我们自己撒谎

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2012-01-01 DOI: 10.5860/choice.50-2953

D. Ariely, Michael Davis

引用次数: 303

Ensuring the integrity, accessibility, and stewardship of research data in the digital age 确保数字时代研究数据的完整性、可访问性和管理

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2009-01-01 DOI: 10.17226/12615

E. Berger, B. Gert, P. Osseweijer

引用次数: 81

Is There a Human Right to Medical Insurance 医疗保险是一种人权吗

IF 0.4

BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL Pub Date : 2008-07-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.1945989

W. Block

{"title":"Is There a Human Right to Medical Insurance","authors":"W. Block","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1945989","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1945989","url":null,"abstract":"Paul Krugman (2004, 2005) has written a series of articles on our present socialized medical system. Implicit in his publications is the claim that medical service is a human right, and that our present system does a poor job of providing for and safeguarding it, in that, in particular, not all people are covered by health insurance. Hence, we are an unjust society. Some of his criticisms are very telling.The present paper argues, however, that his problems with the present system stem from it socialist and fascist elements, not from free enterprise, as he contends. Instead of calling for markets, freely determined prices and laissez faire capitalism for health care, Krugman urges that we go even further in the direction of medical central planning and government regulation, precisely the causes of the problems he mentions.This is akin to complaining about the transmission of a car, when the reason it will not function is that all four of its tires are flat. To wit, Krugman blames the plight of our medical industry on – wait for it – too much competition, when the real problem is that we do not have nearly enough of this rare and precious element of free market economics. It is precisely the lack of competition that is responsible for our medical difficulties.We utilize section II of this paper in an attempt to shed light on the issue of human rights, and to ask if medical care can qualify in this regard. We reject all such claims. In section III we discuss problems on the supply side of medicine: entry restrictions for doctors. Section IV is given over to an analysis of the demand side of this market: the moral hazard imposed by the subsidy system on patients. The purpose of section V is to focus on yet two other aspects of the disarray of medical economics: the malpractice scandal, and the fact that medical socialism, just like socialism for the entire economy, leads to planning irrationality. In section VI we focus more narrowly on Krugman’s specific criticisms. We conclude in section VII.","PeriodicalId":53983,"journal":{"name":"BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL ETHICS JOURNAL","volume":"27 1","pages":"1-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2008-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67806791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1