Skip to main content
Log in

Do Shareholders Have Obligations to Stakeholders?

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The question of whether, and to what extent, business managers have obligations to stakeholders has been the principal theme in much of recent business ethics literature. The question of whether shareholders have obligations to stakeholders, however, has not been addressed sufficiently. I provide some needed attention to this matter by examining the positions of shareholders in the contemporary world of investing. Their positions are considerably different than that often envisioned by business ethicists and economists where shareholders determine the directions of corporate activities through their voting decisions. Typical contemporary investors rarely control corporate activities. If they own corporate securities directly, generally they own too small an interest to exercise control. And, in most cases, they do not even own corporate securities directly, but, rather, own shares in funds. Because of the positions of shareholders today, it is highly questionable whether most have obligations to stakeholders. This has a significant implication for business managers. Whether or not shareholders have obligations to stakeholders, business managers have a greater obligation to educate shareholders about how corporate activities affect stakeholders. I provide a justification for that obligation and comment on how business managers might begin to fulfill it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aquinas, T.: 1969, Summa Theologiae, tr. by J. Fearon, O.P. (McGraw-Hill, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle: 1985, Nicomachean Ethics, tr. by T. Irwin (Hackett Publishing Company, Indianapolis, IN).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatright, J.: 1994, 'What's so Special About Shareholder?', Business Ethics Quarterly 4, 393-407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt, R.: 1963, 'Toward a Credible Form of Rule Utilitarianism', in H.-N. Castañeda and G. Nakhnikian (eds.), Morality and the Language of Conduct (Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI), pp. 107-140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon, C.: 1983, 'Tylenol's Rebound', Los Angeles Times (September 25), 1, 16.

  • Donaldson, T.: 1982, Corporations and Morality (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. Dunfee: 1994, 'Toward a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory', Academy of Management Review 19, 252-284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. Dunfee: 1999, Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.: 1994, 'The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions', Business Ethics Quarterly 4, 409-421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1962, Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago University Press, Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1970, 'The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits', The New York Times Magazine (September 13), 32-33, 122–126.

  • Gauthier, D.: 1986, Morals by Agreement (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodpaster, K.: 1991, 'Business Ethics and Stake-holder Analysis', Business Ethics Quarterly 1, 53-73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D.: 1975, Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, 3rd ed., ed. by L. A. Selby-Bigge (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D.: 1978, A Treatise of Human Nature, 2nd ed., ed. by L. A. Selby-Bigge (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I.: 1964, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, tr. by H. J. Paton (Harper & Row Publishers, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Langtry, B.: 1994, 'Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business', Business Ethics Quarterly 4, 431-443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C. and A. Lewis: 1999, 'Morals and Markets: The Case of Ethical Investing', Business Ethics Quarterly 9, 439-452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S.: 1957, Utilitarianism, ed. by O. Piest (Macmillan Publishing Company, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moody-Adams, M.: 1994, 'Culture, Responsibility, and Affected Ignorance', Ethics 104, 291-309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J.: 1990, 'What is Really Unethical About Insider Trading?', Journal of Business Ethics 9, 172-174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. S.: 1996, 'Moral Thinking in Management: An Essential Capability', Business Ethics Quarterly 6, 477-492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R.: 1997, 'Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness', Business Ethics Quarterly 7, 51-66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J.: 1971, A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W. D.: 1930, The Right and the Good (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlossberger, E.: 1994, 'A New Model of Business: Dual-Investor Theory', Business Ethics Quarterly 4, 459-474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrader, D.: 1996, 'The Oddness of Corporate Ownership', Journal of Social Philosophy 27, 104-127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H.: 'Culpable Ignorance', Philosophical Review 92, 543-571.

  • Zimmerman, M.: 1997, 'Moral Responsibility and Ignorance', Ethics 107, 410-426.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Spurgin, E.W. Do Shareholders Have Obligations to Stakeholders?. Journal of Business Ethics 33, 287–297 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011819303241

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011819303241

Navigation