Date: 15 Nov 2012
Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’
- Samuel Mansell
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This article draws on the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant to explore whether a corporate ‘duty of beneficence’ to non-shareholders is consistent with the orthodox ‘shareholder theory’ of the firm. It examines the ethical framework of Milton Friedman’s argument and asks whether it necessarily rules out the well-being of non-shareholders as a corporate objective. The article examines Kant’s distinction between ‘duties of right’ and ‘duties of virtue’ (the latter including the duty of beneficence) and investigates their consistency with the shareholder theory. The article concludes that it is possible within the ethical framework of shareholder theory for managers to pursue directly the happiness of non-shareholders. Furthermore, shareholders have a duty to hold management to account for the moral consequences of the firm’s activities on non-shareholding stakeholders.
Blair, M. (1995). Ownership and control: Rethinking corporate governance for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Bowie, N. (1999). A Kantian approach to business. In R. Frederick (Ed.), A companion to business ethics (pp. 3–16). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRef
Buchanan, B., Netter, J., & Yang, T. (2010). Are shareholder proposals an important corporate governance device? Evidence from US and UK shareholder proposals. Retrieved April 5, 2012 from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1572016.
Chryssides, G., & Kaler, J. (1993). An introduction to business ethics. Hampshire: Cengage-Learning.
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. (1994). Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. The Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252–284.
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. (1995). Integrative social contracts theory: A communitarian conception of economic ethics. Economics and Philosophy, 11(1), 85–112.CrossRef
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.
Ertimur, Y., Ferri, F., & Muslu, V. (2011). Shareholder activism and CEO pay. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(2), 535–592.CrossRef
Freeman, R. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421.CrossRef
Freeman, R., & Evan, W. (1990). Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation. Journal of Behavioural Economics, 19(4), 337–360.CrossRef
Freeman, R., Harrison, J., Wicks, A., Parmar, B., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved April 5, 2012 from http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html.
Goodpaster, K. (1991). Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1(1), 53–73.
Gregor, M. (1996). Translator’s note on the text. In Kant, I. & Gregor, M. (Trans.), The metaphysics of morals (pp. xxxii–xvi). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social responsibility. London: The Institute of Economic Affairs.
Jensen, M. (2002). Value maximisation, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.CrossRef
Jensen, M. (2008). ‘Non-rational Behaviour, Value Conflicts, Stakeholder Theory, and Firm Behaviour’, in Agle, B., T. Donaldson, R. Freeman, M. Jensen, R. Mitchell, and D. Wood, ‘Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(2), 153–190.CrossRef
Kaler, J. (2003). Differentiating stakeholder theories. Journal of Business Ethics, 46(1), 71–83.CrossRef
Kaler, J. (2006). Evaluating stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(3), 249–268.CrossRef
Kant, I. (1785/1998). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1797/1996). The metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1997). Lectures on ethics (P. Heath and J. Schneewind, Eds.; P. Heath, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laplume, A., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1152–1189.CrossRef
Lea, D. (2004). The imperfect nature of corporate responsibilities to stakeholders. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), 201–217.CrossRef
Mansell, S. (2013). Capitalism, corporations and the social contract: A critique of stakeholder theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marcoux, A. (2003). A fiduciary argument against stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 1–24.CrossRef
McMahon, C. (1995). The political theory of organizations and business ethics. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 24(4), 292–313.CrossRef
Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.
Monks, R., Miller, A., & Cook, J. (2004). Shareholder activism on environmental issues: A study of proposals at large US corporations (2000–2003). Natural Resources Forum, 28, 317–330.CrossRef
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state and utopia. Oxford: Blackwell.
O’Neill, O. (1996). Towards justice and virtue: A constructive account of practical reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
O’Neill, O. (2001). Duty and Obligation. In L. Becker & C. Becker (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of ethics. New York: Routledge.
Phillips, R. (1997). Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(1), 51–66.CrossRef
Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Principles for Responsible Investment. (n.d.). The principles for responsible investment. Retrieved April 5, 2012 from http://www.unpri.org/principles/.
Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice (revised edition) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sacconi, L. (2004). Corporate social responsibility (csr) as a model of “extended” corporate governance. An explanation based on the economic theories of social contract, reputation and reciprocal conformism, Liuc Papers n. 142, Serie Etica, Diritto ed Economica 10.
Sacconi, L. (2006). A social contract account for CSR as an extended model of corporate governance (I): Rational bargaining and justification. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(3), 259–281.CrossRef
Sternberg, E. (2000). Just business: Business ethics in action (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sternberg, E. (2004). Corporate governance: Accountability in the marketplace. London: Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
Sullivan, R. (1996). Introduction. In Kant, I. & Gregor, M. (Trans.), The metaphysics of morals (pp. vii–xxvi). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tax Justice Network. (2005a). What is the Tax Justice Network? Retrieved January 9, 2009 from http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/front_content.php?idcat=53).
Tax Justice Network. (2005). Tax us if you can: The true story of a global failure. London: Tax Justice Network.
Thomas, R., & Cotter, J. (2007). Shareholder proposals in the new millennium: Shareholder support, board response and market reaction. Journal of Corporate Finance, 13, 368–391.CrossRef
Timmermann, J. (2005). Good but not required? Assessing the demands of Kantian ethics. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 2(1), 9–27.CrossRef
Timmermann, J. (2013). Kantian dilemmas? Moral conflict in Kant’s ethical theory. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 95(1).
United Nations Global Compact. (n.d.). The ten principles. Retrieved March 29, 2012 from http://www.unglobalcompact.org/AboutTheGC/TheTenPrinciples/index.html.
Van Buren, I. I. I. H. (2001). If fairness is the problem, is consent the solution? Integrating ISCT and stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(3), 481–499.CrossRef
Velamuri, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2005). Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: A Knightian insight. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(3), 249–262.CrossRef
- Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’
Journal of Business Ethics
Volume 117, Issue 3 , pp 583-599
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Duty of beneficence
- Imperfect duties
- Property rights
- Shareholder theory
- Stakeholder theory
- Shareholder activism
- Industry Sectors
- Samuel Mansell (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. School of Management, University of St. Andrews, The Gateway, North Haugh, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9RJ, UK