Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Parrèsiastic Stakeholders: A Different Approach to Ethical Institutions

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

Abstract

Are we really in need of (new) ethical institutions that regulate and control the ethical quality of corporate behavior? The various scandals (Enron, WorldOnline, Ahold) prove that ethical institutions, as well as deontological codes, public social commitments, social annual reports directly linked to financial overviews, are not enough to prevent fraud, corruption or bribery. Does the existence of those institutions partly provoke and legitimize the unbridled and immense power of organizational and CEO-(non-ethical) behavior and window-dressing? Do we need more separate ethical institutions? Is it possible to outsource the competence of an ethical corporate and personal moral responsibility to another, separate institution? Do people and corporations still feel the confrontation with moral dilemmas with the institutionalizing of a part of that responsibility to an anonymous body? And won't this ethical control lead to a further alienation of the micro level personal responsibility to the macro performance of the market and organizations? This article focuses on the counterpart of the institution: tomorrow's stakeholder. The stakeholder of tomorrow (the manager, the CEO, the consumer, the employee, the civil servant...) embodies the complexity of the multi-paradigmatic business ethics debate. Two aspects of tomorrow's stakeholders' presence will be discussed: their moral attitude and emancipative communication.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agamber, G.: 2002, Homo Sacer, Dutch translation (Boom — Parrèsia).

  • Bauman, Z.: 1993, Postmodern Ethics (Blackwell).

  • Berns, E., S. Ijsseling and P. Moyaert: 1979, Denken in Parijs, Samsom Uitgeverij, Alphen aan den Rijn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, L.: 1994, Conflict en Inter-esse, VUBPRESS/ Stichting CINCOOP.

  • Beyers, L.: 1996, ‘Het andere conflict’, in: Verschil en geschil (Kritiek vzw Gent), pp. 112–156.

  • Beyers, L.: 2000, ‘Norm en ervaring: een tegenspraak’, in: Norm en ervaring (Hogeschool, Gent), pp. 44–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J.: 1998, Cannibal with Forks (New Society Publishers).

  • Foucault, M.: 1989, Parrèsia (Krisis Onderzoek, Amsterdam).

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M.: 1993, ‘Qu’est-ce que les Lumières?’ Magazine Litèraire, 309, 69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M.: 1994, Dits et Ecrits IV (Éditions Gallimard).

  • Foucault, M.: 1995, Breekbare Vrijheid (Boom/Parrèsia Amsterdam).

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M.: 2001, Herméneutique du sujet (Gallimard Seuil).

  • Freeman, E.R.: 2003, ‘A Stakeholder Approach to Management: The state-of-the-art’, in M. Hitt, E. Freeman and J. Harrison (eds.), Handbook of Strategic Management, (Blackwell Publishing, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A.: 1990, The Consequences of Modernity (Polity Press).

  • Jeurissen, R.: 2002, De onderneming als wereldburger (Oratie, Universiteit Nyenrode, Breukelen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Karssing, E.: 2000, Morele competenties in organisaties (van Gorcum, Assen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kritzman, L. (ed.): 1988, Michel Foucault: Politics, Philosophy, Culture (Routledge, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Langenberg, S.: 1998, ‘Listening to the Paint of an Authentic Story’, in: Memory, History and Critique. European Identity at the Milennium. Proceedings of the 6th International ISSEI Conference at the University for Humanist Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands, ISSEI Cd-rom.

  • Langenberg, S.: 1999, ‘What About the Modernistic Concept of Consciousness?’, in: Metadebates 8 (Kluwer Academic Publishers).

  • Lefort, C.: 1986, Essaies sur le politique (Éditions du Seuil).

  • Simons, R.: 1995, ‘Control in an Age of Empowerment’, Harvard Business Review (March–April).

  • Townley, B.: 1995, Reframing Human Resource Management (SAGE publications).

  • van de Ven, B.: 1998, Rationaliteit en ethiek in de onderneming (Tilburg University Press).

  • Vintges, K.: 2003, De terugkeer van het engagement (Boom–Parrèsia, Amsterdam).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Suzan Langenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Langenberg, S. Parrèsiastic Stakeholders: A Different Approach to Ethical Institutions. Journal of Business Ethics 53, 39–50 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039398.96906.41

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039398.96906.41

Search

Navigation