Toward an Integrated Model of Ethical Decision-Making in Marketing: The Role of Existentialism

Abstract

Models of ethical decision-making in marketing generally have been developed from means or process oriented and ends-oriented theoretical foundations (e.g., Hunt and Vitell 1986; Ferrell, Gresham, and Fraedrich 1989; Malhotra and Miller 1998). These two approaches have provided the decision-maker with ethical views that focus upon the established principles of ethical conduct and upon the consequences of one's actions. Though there exists many variations and attempts at hybridization within these two approaches (e.g., Ross' (1975) primae facie theory and Berkley's (1957) rule utilitarianism), essentially they lead toward decisions that are duty-bound (i.e., deontology) or results-bound (i.e., teleology). The recurring emphasis upon these two approaches in the business context is not surprising as they methodologically suit the business environment. For example, the deontological approach is rule-based. So whether one is abiding by the individual firm's code of ethics or by the profession's code of ethics (e.g., American Marketing Association Code of Ethics) one may be perceived to be acting deontologically. Similarly, if one's decisions are based from the teleological perspective, then the decision-maker will be adhering to a rational calculation that factors in the greatest good for the firm (local-utilitarianism) and/or for the commonweal (cosmopolitan utilitarianism). Generally speaking then, this Janus-headed approach has more or less defined the "theoretical universe" for business and marketing ethics implicitly and in recent years explicitly, for the practitioner and scholar (Brady 1985; Beauchamp and Bowie 1988; Hunt and Vitell 1986; Kavathatzopoulos 1993). In this paper, we argue for the expansion of this business ethics "universe" to include a third and radically different theoretical approach to ethical decision-making in marketing. This third approach is existentialism.