Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Social Contracting in a Pluralist Process of Moral Sense Making: A Dialogic Twist on the ISCT

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

Abstract

This paper applies Wempe’s (2005, Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1), 113–135) boundary conditions that define the external and internal logics for contractarian business ethics theory, as a system of argumentation for evaluating current or prospective institutional arrangements for arriving at the “good life,” based on the principles and practices of social justice. It does so by showing that a more dynamic, process-oriented, and pluralist ‘dialogic twist’ to Donaldson and Dunfee’s (2003, ‘Social Contracts: sic et non’, in P. Heugens, H. van Oosterhout and J. Vromen (eds.), The Social Institutions of Capitalism: Evolution and Design of Social Contracts (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd.) pp. 109–126; 1999, Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics (Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press); 1995, Economics and Philosophy 11(1), 85–112; 1994, Academy of Management Review 19(2), 252–284.) integrated social contracting theory (ISCT) of economic ethics will further develop this promising and influential approach to moral reasoning, ethical decision-making, and stakeholder governance. This evolutionary, interactive learning-based model of ethical norm generation via dialogic stakeholder engagement is particularly appropriate within economic communities that are experiencing value conflict and pressures for institutional change.

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

  • Ackoff R. L.(1999). Recreating the Corporation: A Design for the 21st Century. New York, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriof J., Waddock S., Husted B., Rahman S. (eds) (2002). Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking: Theory, Responsibility, and Engagement. Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M., Deetz S. (1996). Critical Theory and Postmodern Approaches to Organizational Studies. In: Clegg S. R., Hardy C., Nord W. P. (eds), Handbook of Organization Studies. London, Sage Publications, pp. 191–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib S. (1990). Afterward: Communicative Ethics and Contemporary Controversies in Practical Philosophy. In: Benhabib S., Dallmayr F. (eds), The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, pp. 330–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib S. (1993). Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. New York, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger P. L., Luckmann T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise on the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City NY, Anchor Books

    Google Scholar 

  • Binmore K. (1994). Game Theory and the Social Contract: Vol. 1. Playing Fair. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrell G., Morgan G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London, Heinemann

    Google Scholar 

  • Boatright J. (2000). Contract Theory and Business Ethics. A Review of Ties that Bind. Business and Society Review 105(4):52–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calton J. M., Lad L. J. (1995). Social Contracting as a Trust-building Process of Stakeholder Governance. Business Ethics Quarterly 5(2):271–295

    Google Scholar 

  • Calton J.M., Payne S.L. (2003). Coping with Paradox: Multi-stakeholder Learning Dialogue as a Pluralist Sensemaking Process for Addressing Messy Problems. Business & Society 42(1):7–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell D. (2003). The Relational Constitution of Contractual Agreements. In: Heugens P., van Oosterhout H., Vromen J. (eds), The Social Institutions of Capitalism: Evolution and Design of Social Contracts. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd., pp. 38–65

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio P., Powell W. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 46:147–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T. (1996). Values in Tension. Ethics Away from Home. Harvard Business Review 74(5):48–56

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T., Dunfee T. (2003). Social Contracts: sic et non. In: Heugens P., van Oosterhout H., Vromen J. (eds), The Social Institutions of Capitalism: Evolution and Design of Social Contracts. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd, pp. 109–126

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T., Dunfee T. W. (1994). Toward a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory. Academy of Management Review 19(2):252–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T., Dunfee T. W. (1995). Integrative Social Contracts Theory: A Communitarian Conception of Economic Ethics. Economics and Philosophy 11(1):85–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunfee T. W. (1991). Business Ethics and Extant Social Contracts. Business Ethics Quarterly 1:23–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynn M. A., Barr P. S., Dacin M. T. (2000). Pluralism and the Problem of Variety. Academy of Management Review 25(4):726–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson A. (2000). Making Sense of Postmodern Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 10(3):645–658

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: 1992, Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics (C.P. Cronin, trans.) (Cambridge MA, MIT Press).

  • Habermas, J.: 1990, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (Lenhard, C. and S.W. Nicholsen, trans.) (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press).

  • Isaacs W. (1999). Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together: A Pioneering Approach to Communicating in Business and in Life. New York, Currency-Doubleday

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen M. C., Meckling W. M. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3:379–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Cramer, M. and R. Phillips: 2004, ‘Ties that Unwind: Dynamism in Integrative Social Contracts Theory’, Paper presented at Contractarian Approaches to Business Ethics: The Evolution of Integrative Social Contracts Theory, a conference sponsored by the Carol and Lawrence Zicklin Center for Business Ethics Research, November 12–13, 2004.

  • Jones T. (1995). Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics. Academy of Management Review 20:404–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamee S., Gergen K. J. (1999). Relational Responsibility: Resources for Sustainable Dialogue. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNeil, I.R.: 1985, ‘Relational Contracts: What We Do and Do Not Know’, Wisconsin Law Review 483–525.

  • Nielsen R. (1996). The Politics of Ethics: Methods of Acting, Learning, and Sometimes Fighting with Others in Addressing Ethics Problems in Organizational Life. New York, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connell L. L, Stephens C. U., Betz M., Shepard J. M., Hendry J. R. (2005). An Organizational Field Approach to Corporate Rationality: The Role of Stakeholder Activism. Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1):93–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne S. L., Calton J. M. (2002). Towards a Managerial Practice of Stakeholder Engagement: Developing Multi-stakeholder Learning Dialogues. In: Andriof J., Waddock S., Husted B., and Rahman S. (eds), Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking: Theory, Responsibility and Engagement. Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Publishing, pp. 121–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips R.A. (2003). Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics. San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA, Belknap Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard B. H., Sherman D. M. (1998). The Grammars of Trust: A Model and General Implications. Academy of management Review 23(3):422–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer A., Dunfee T. W., Bailey W. J. (2004). Does National Context Matter in Ethical Decision Making? An Empirical Test of Integrative Social Contracts Theory. Academy of Management Journal 47(4):610–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson D. L. (1999). Toward an Integrative Theory of Business and society: A Research Strategy for Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review 24(3):1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svendsen, A.C. and M. Laberge: 2005. ‘Convening Stakeholder Networks: A New Way of Thinking, Being and Engaging’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship 19, 91–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Oosterhout, J.H., P.M.A.R. Heugens and M. Kaptein: (forthcoming), ‘The Internal Morality of Contracting: Redeeming the Contractualist Endeavor in Business Ethics’, Academy of Management Review.

  • Van Willigenburg T. (2003). Sources of Normativity: Reflectivity Versus Social Contracting. In: Heugens P., van Oosterhout H., Vromen J. (eds), The Social Institutions of Capitalism: Evolution and Design of Social Contracts. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd, pp. 127–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddell S. (2005). Societal Learning and Change: How Governments, Business and Civil Society are Creating Solutions to Complex Multi-stakeholder Problems. Sheffield, UK, Greenleaf Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock S. (2002). Leading Corporate Citizens: Vision, Values, Value Added. Boston, McGraw-Hill/Irwin

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton C. (1993). Business Ethics and Postmodernism: A Dangerous Dalliance. Business Ethics Quarterly 3:285–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer M. (1994). Thick and Thin. Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame, IN, University of Notre Dame Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wempe B. (2005). In Defense of a Self-disciplined, Domain-specific Social Contract Theory of Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1):113–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson O. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, and Relational Contracting. New York, Free Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business & Economics, University of Hawaii at Hilo, 200 W. Kawili Street, Hilo, HI, 96720-4091, USA

    Jerry M. Calton

Authors
  1. Jerry M. Calton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jerry M. Calton.

Additional information

Jerry M. Calton is Professor of Management at the University of Hawaii at Hilo. His research interests encompass multi-stakeholder learning dialogue, trust-based network governance, and the social contracting approach to ethical decision-making. His publications have appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Society, Business Ethics Quarterly, the Journal of Corporate Citizenship, and elsewhere.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Calton, J.M. Social Contracting in a Pluralist Process of Moral Sense Making: A Dialogic Twist on the ISCT. J Bus Ethics 68, 329–346 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9017-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9017-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation