人力资源管理从业人员是否需要具备企业伦理方面的能力?对澳大利亚和亚洲资格证书的内容分析

IF 1.9 Q2 ETHICS
Michael Segon, Chris Booth, Andrew Roberts
{"title":"人力资源管理从业人员是否需要具备企业伦理方面的能力?对澳大利亚和亚洲资格证书的内容分析","authors":"Michael Segon, Chris Booth, Andrew Roberts","doi":"10.1007/s13520-024-00206-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ethical cultures, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and sustainability strategies are increasingly being addressed through formal organisational policies and structures. This is evidenced by codes of ethics, conduct, whistle-blowing reporting lines, anti-bribery and corruption policies, and broader stakeholder and environmental engagement strategies. In the United States, corporate ethics managers are responsible for these functions, supported by specific professional and university-level qualifications. However, this is not the case in Australia and Asia where the role appears delegated to human resource personnel in organisations. Human resource management (HRM) is increasingly advanced as a formal profession, yet whether corporate ethics content features as a significant component of the HRM profession is unclear. Expert knowledge is a foundation of a profession along with the duty to act within the limits of that knowledge and expertise. This paper scopes what constitutes professional expert knowledge. It examines corporate ethics expertise and HRM within this context. Major Australian and Asian organisations are examined to verify that HRM Departments, and thus HRM practitioners, are responsible for managing corporate ethics. Given the seniority and strategic importance of this function, the content of selected Masters in HRM and related fields are examined to identify the extent of ethics content. This is considered in the light of the expertise required to manage corporate ethics, and conclusions are drawn whether the HRM discipline is appropriately qualified to manage this function. Finally, recommendations and further research towards advancing the role and function of corporate ethics managers in general are proposed.</p>","PeriodicalId":54051,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Business Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are HRM practitioners required to possess competence in corporate ethics? A content analysis of qualifications in Australia and Asia\",\"authors\":\"Michael Segon, Chris Booth, Andrew Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13520-024-00206-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Ethical cultures, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and sustainability strategies are increasingly being addressed through formal organisational policies and structures. This is evidenced by codes of ethics, conduct, whistle-blowing reporting lines, anti-bribery and corruption policies, and broader stakeholder and environmental engagement strategies. In the United States, corporate ethics managers are responsible for these functions, supported by specific professional and university-level qualifications. However, this is not the case in Australia and Asia where the role appears delegated to human resource personnel in organisations. Human resource management (HRM) is increasingly advanced as a formal profession, yet whether corporate ethics content features as a significant component of the HRM profession is unclear. Expert knowledge is a foundation of a profession along with the duty to act within the limits of that knowledge and expertise. This paper scopes what constitutes professional expert knowledge. It examines corporate ethics expertise and HRM within this context. Major Australian and Asian organisations are examined to verify that HRM Departments, and thus HRM practitioners, are responsible for managing corporate ethics. Given the seniority and strategic importance of this function, the content of selected Masters in HRM and related fields are examined to identify the extent of ethics content. This is considered in the light of the expertise required to manage corporate ethics, and conclusions are drawn whether the HRM discipline is appropriately qualified to manage this function. Finally, recommendations and further research towards advancing the role and function of corporate ethics managers in general are proposed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Business Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Business Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-024-00206-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Business Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-024-00206-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

道德文化、企业社会责任(CSR)和可持续发展战略正越来越多地通过正式的组织政策和结构来解决。道德规范、行为准则、举报热线、反贿赂和反腐败政策,以及更广泛的利益相关者和环境参与战略都证明了这一点。在美国,企业道德管理人员负责这些职能,并有特定的专业和大学水平的资格证书作为支持。然而,澳大利亚和亚洲的情况并非如此,在那里,这一职责似乎被委派给了组织中的人力资源人员。人力资源管理(HRM)作为一种正式的职业正日益发展,但企业伦理内容是否作为人力资源管理职业的一个重要组成部分尚不清楚。专业知识是专业的基础,同时也是在知识和专业范围内行事的责任。本文探讨了什么是专业的专家知识。本文在此背景下研究了企业伦理专业知识和人力资源管理。本文考察了澳大利亚和亚洲的主要组织,以核实人力资源管理部门以及人力资源管理从业人员是否有责任管理企业伦理。考虑到这一职能的资历和战略重要性,对人力资源管理和相关领域的部分硕士课程内容进行了研究,以确定伦理内容的范围。根据管理企业伦理所需的专业知识对这些内容进行了审议,并得出结论,人力资源管理学科是否具备管理这一职能的适当资格。最后,提出了一些建议和进一步的研究,以促进企业伦理管理人员的作用和职能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are HRM practitioners required to possess competence in corporate ethics? A content analysis of qualifications in Australia and Asia

Ethical cultures, corporate social responsibility (CSR), and sustainability strategies are increasingly being addressed through formal organisational policies and structures. This is evidenced by codes of ethics, conduct, whistle-blowing reporting lines, anti-bribery and corruption policies, and broader stakeholder and environmental engagement strategies. In the United States, corporate ethics managers are responsible for these functions, supported by specific professional and university-level qualifications. However, this is not the case in Australia and Asia where the role appears delegated to human resource personnel in organisations. Human resource management (HRM) is increasingly advanced as a formal profession, yet whether corporate ethics content features as a significant component of the HRM profession is unclear. Expert knowledge is a foundation of a profession along with the duty to act within the limits of that knowledge and expertise. This paper scopes what constitutes professional expert knowledge. It examines corporate ethics expertise and HRM within this context. Major Australian and Asian organisations are examined to verify that HRM Departments, and thus HRM practitioners, are responsible for managing corporate ethics. Given the seniority and strategic importance of this function, the content of selected Masters in HRM and related fields are examined to identify the extent of ethics content. This is considered in the light of the expertise required to manage corporate ethics, and conclusions are drawn whether the HRM discipline is appropriately qualified to manage this function. Finally, recommendations and further research towards advancing the role and function of corporate ethics managers in general are proposed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
38.50%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Asian Journal of Business Ethics (AJBE) publishes original articles from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives concerning ethical issues related to business in Asia, including East, Southeast and South-central Asia. Like its well-known sister publication Journal of Business Ethics, AJBE examines the moral dimensions of production, consumption, labour relations, and organizational behavior, while taking into account the unique societal and ethical perspectives of the Asian region.  The term ''business'' is understood in a wide sense to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services, while ''ethics'' is understood as applying to all human action aimed at securing a good life. We believe that issues concerning corporate responsibility are within the scope of ethics broadly construed. Systems of production, consumption, marketing, advertising, social and economic accounting, labour relations, public relations and organizational behaviour will be analyzed from a moral or ethical point of view. The style and level of dialogue involve all who are interested in business ethics - the business community, universities, government agencies, non-government organizations and consumer groups.The AJBE viewpoint is especially relevant today, as global business initiatives bring eastern and western companies together in new and ever more complex patterns of cooperation and competition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信