Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 121, Issue 3, pp 477–495 | Cite as

Situating ‘Giving Voice to Values’: A Metatheoretical Evaluation of a New Approach to Business Ethics



The evaluation of new theories and pedagogical approaches to business ethics is an essential task for ethicists. This is true not only for empirical and applied evaluation but also for metatheoretical evaluation. However, while there is increasing interest in the practical utility and empirical testing of ethical theories, there has been little systematic evaluation of how new theories relate to existing ones or what novel conceptual characteristics they might contribute. This paper aims to address this lack by discussing the role of metatheorising in assessing new approaches to ethics. The approach is illustrated through evaluating a new pedagogy and curriculum for ethics education called Giving Voice to Values (GVV). Our method involves identifying a number of metatheoretical lenses from existing reviews of ethical theories and applying these to examine GVV’s conceptual elements. Although GVV has been explicitly presented as a pedagogy and teaching curriculum, we argue that it has the potential to contribute significantly to the development of ethical theory. We discuss the general implications of this metatheoretical method of evaluation for new approaches to business ethics and for GVV and its future development.


Metatheoretical evaluation Metatheory building Giving Voice to Values Performative ethics Communicative ethics 


  1. Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Metatheory: Lessons from social identity research. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 8(2), 98–106.Google Scholar
  2. Adkins, C. P., Gentile, M. C., & Ingols, C. (2012). Teaching ‘‘how’’-not ‘‘whether’’-to manage with integrity: Undergraduate and MBA applications of the ‘‘Giving Voice to Values’’ curriculum. In C. Wankel & A. Stachowicz-Stanusch (Eds.), Management education for integrity: Ethically educating tomorrow’s business (pp. 107–135). Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
  3. Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2004). Putting the ‘S’ back in corporate social responsibility: A multi-level theory of social change in organizations. SSRN eLibrary. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.567842.
  4. Alcaraz, J. M., & Thiruvattal, E. (2010). An interview with Manuel Escudero the United Nations’ principles for responsible management education: A global call for sustainability. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3), 542–550.Google Scholar
  5. Alzola, M. (2011). The reconciliation project: Separation and integration in business ethics research. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 19–36.Google Scholar
  6. Ashforth, B. E., Gioia, D. A., Robinson, S. L., & Trevino, L. K. (2008). Reviewing organizational corruption. Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 670–684.Google Scholar
  7. Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 496.Google Scholar
  8. Barsky, A. (2011). Investigating the effects of moral disengagement and participation on unethical work behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 104(1), 59–75.Google Scholar
  9. Bartlett, D. (2003). Management and business ethics: A critique and integration of ethical decision-making models. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 223–235.Google Scholar
  10. Bauman, Z. (1993). Postmodern ethics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Beauchamp, T. L., Bowie, N. E., & Arnold, D. G. (2009). Ethical theory and business (8th ed.). London: Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Bell, G. G., & Dyck, B. (2011). Conventional resource-based theory and its radical alternative: A less materialist-individualist approach to strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 121–130.Google Scholar
  13. Bird, F. (1996). The muted conscience: Moral silence and the practice of ethics in business. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
  14. Boatright, J. R. (2011). Ethics and the conduct of business (7th ed.). Melbourne: Pearson.Google Scholar
  15. Brady, F. N., & Dunn, C. P. (1995). Business meta-ethics: An analysis of two theories. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5(3), 385–398.Google Scholar
  16. Brännmark, J. (2009). Ethical theories and the transparency condition. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 12(5), 449.Google Scholar
  17. Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.Google Scholar
  18. Butler, J. (1997). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Byrne, E. F. (2002). Business ethics: A helpful hybrid in search of integrity. Journal of Business Ethics, 37(2), 121–133.Google Scholar
  20. Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (Eds.). (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.Google Scholar
  21. Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Business and Society, 38(3), 268–295.Google Scholar
  22. Carroll, A. B. (2000). Ethical challenges for business in the new millennium: Corporate social responsibility and models of management morality. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), 33–42.Google Scholar
  23. Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2007). Business ethics as practice. British Journal of Management, 18(2), 107–122.Google Scholar
  24. Collier, J. (1998). Theorising the ethical organization. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8(4), 621–654.Google Scholar
  25. Colomy, P. (1991). Metatheorizing in a postpositivist frame. Sociological Perspectives, 34(3), 269–286.Google Scholar
  26. Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (2001). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In D. L. Cooperrider, J. Peter, F. Sorensen, T. F. Yaeger, & D. Whitney (Eds.), Appreciative inquiry: An emerging direction for organization development. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Cottone, R. R., & Ronald, E. C. (2000). Ethical decision-making models: A review of the literature. Journal of Counseling and Development: JCD, 78(3), 275.Google Scholar
  28. Crane, A. (1999). Are you ethical? Please tick □ yes or □ no: On researching ethics in business organisations. Journal of Business Ethics, 20(3), 237–248.Google Scholar
  29. Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2007). Corporate social responsibility—Volume I: Theories and concepts of corporate social responsibility. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Davis, A., & Rothstein, H. (2006). The effects of the perceived behavioral integrity of managers on employee attitudes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 407–419.Google Scholar
  31. DeGeorge, R. T. (2009). Business ethics (7th ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  32. Derry, R., & Green, R. M. (1989). Ethical theory in business ethics: A critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 8(7), 521–533.Google Scholar
  33. Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Implicit voice theories: Taken-for-granted rules of self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 461–488.Google Scholar
  34. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrated social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252–284.Google Scholar
  35. Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  36. Donaldson, T., Werhane, P. H., & Van Zandt, J. D. (2008). Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach. New York: Pearson/Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Drumwright, M. E., & Murphy, P. E. (2004). How advertising practitioners view ethics: Moral muteness, moral myopia, and moral imagination. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 7–24.Google Scholar
  38. Edwards, M. G. (2008). Evaluating integral metatheory. Journal of Integral Theory and Practice, 3(4), 61–83.Google Scholar
  39. Edwards, M. G. (2009). An integrative metatheory for organisational learning and sustainability. The Learning Organization, 16(3), 189–207.Google Scholar
  40. Edwards, M. G. (2010). Organisational transformation for sustainability: An integral metatheory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Edwards, M. G., Webb, D., Chappell, S., & Gentile, M. (2012). Giving Voice to Values: A new perspective on ethics in globalised organisational environments. In C. Wankel & S. Malleck (Eds.), Ethical models and applications of globalization: Culture, socio-political and economic perspectives (pp. 160–185). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  42. Egels-Zanden, N., & Sandberg, J. (2010). Distinctions in descriptive and instrumental stakeholder theory: A challenge for empirical research. Business Ethics: A European Review, 19(1), 35–49.Google Scholar
  43. Fesmire, S. (2003). John Dewey and moral imagination: Pragmatism in ethics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Fisher, C. M. L. A., & Lovell, A. (2009). Business ethics and values: Individual, corporate and international perspectives (3rd ed.). Harlow, England: New York.Google Scholar
  45. Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. L. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Geels, F. W. (2010). Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Research Policy, 39(4), 495–510.Google Scholar
  47. Gentile, M. C. (2008a, Summer). The 21st-century MBA. Strategy + Business, 51, 1–12.Google Scholar
  48. Gentile, M. C. (2008b). Voicing values, finding answers. BizEd, July/August, 40–45.Google Scholar
  49. Gentile, M. C. (2010). Giving Voice to Values: How to speak your mind when you know what’s right. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Gentile, M. C. (Ed.). (2011). Giving voice to values [Special Issue]. Journal of Business Ethics Education, 8(1), 305–392.Google Scholar
  51. Gentile, M. C. (2012a). The Giving Voice to Values curriculum. Accessed 20 Jan 2013.
  52. Gentile, M. C. (2012b). Values-driven leadership development: Where we have been and where we could go. Organization Management Journal, 9(3), 188–196.Google Scholar
  53. Gioia, D. A. (2003). Business organization as instrument of societal responsibility. Organization, 10(3), 435–438.Google Scholar
  54. Gioia, D. A., & Pitre, E. (1990). Multiparadigm perspectives on theory building. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 584–602.Google Scholar
  55. Gond, J. -P., & Matten, D. (2007). Rethinking the business-society interface: Beyond the functionalist trap No. 47-2007 ICCSR Research Paper Series, ISSN 1479-5124. Nottingham, UK: International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility.Google Scholar
  56. Gonzalez-Padron, T. (2012). A critique of Giving Voice to Values approach to business ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10(4), 251–269.Google Scholar
  57. Habermas, Jr. (1993). Justification and application: Remarks on discourse ethics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  58. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.Google Scholar
  59. Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & May, D. R. (2011). Moral maturation and moral conation: A capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 663–685.Google Scholar
  60. Harris, J. D., & Freeman, R. E. (2008). The impossibility of the separation thesis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(4), 541–548.Google Scholar
  61. Heath, J. (2008). Business ethics and moral motivation: A criminological perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 595–614.Google Scholar
  62. Kegley, J. A. K. (2011). The “ethical subject/agent” as “rational individual” but also as so much more. Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 25(1), 116–129.Google Scholar
  63. Kelemen, M., & Peltonen, T. (2001). Ethics, morality and the subject: The contribution of Zygmunt Bauman and Michel Foucault to postmodern business ethics. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17, 151–166.Google Scholar
  64. Kidder, R. (1994). Shared values for a troubled world: Conversations with men and women of conscience. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  65. Lee, L. M. (2012). Public health ethics theory: Review and path to convergence. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 40(1), 85–98.Google Scholar
  66. Lewis, M. W., & Grimes, A. J. (1999). Metatriangulation: Building theory from multiple paradigms. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 672–690.Google Scholar
  67. Luborsky, M. (1994). Identification and analysis of themes and patterns. In J. Gubrium & A. Sanakar (Eds.), Qualitative methods in aging research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  68. Maclagan, P. (2003). Varieties of moral issue and dilemma: A framework for the analysis of case material in business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
  69. McLennan, G. G. (2002). Quandaries in meta-theory: Against pluralism. Economy and Society, 31(3), 483–496.Google Scholar
  70. Meehl, P. (1992). Cliometric metatheory: The actuarial approach to empirical, history-based philosophy of science. Psychological Reports, 71(2), 339.Google Scholar
  71. Melé, D. (2010). Practical wisdom in managerial decision making. The Journal of Management Development, 29(7/8), 637.Google Scholar
  72. Mingers, J. (2011). Ethics and OR: Operationalising discourse ethics. European Journal of Operational Research, 210(1), 114–124.Google Scholar
  73. Nealon, J. T. (1998). Alterity politics: Ethics and performative subjectivity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Nielsen, R. (2010). Practitioner-based theory building in organizational ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(3), 401.Google Scholar
  75. Okhuysen, G., & Bonardi, J.-P. (2011). Editors comments: The challenges of building theory by combining lenses. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 6–11.Google Scholar
  76. O’Toole, J., & Bennis, W. (2009). What’s needed next: A culture of candor. Harvard Business Review, 87(6), 54–61.Google Scholar
  77. Overton, W. F. (2007). A coherent metatheory for dynamic systems: Relational organicism–contextualism. Human Development, 50(2–3), 154–159.Google Scholar
  78. Pardales, M. J. (2002). “So, how did you arrive at that decision?” Connecting moral imagination and moral judgement. Journal of Moral Education, 31(4), 423–437.Google Scholar
  79. Paterson, B. L., Thorne, S. E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  80. Perpich, D. (2008). The ethics of Emmanuel Levinas. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Character strengths and virtues. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Petrick, J., & Quinn, J. F. (1997). Management ethics: Integrity at work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  83. Prentice, R. (2004). Teaching ethics, heuristics, and biases. Journal of Business Ethics Education, 1(1), 55.Google Scholar
  84. Reiter-Theil, S. (2012). What does empirical research contribute to medical ethics? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 21(04), 425–435.Google Scholar
  85. Rest, J. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  86. Ritzer, G. (1991). Metatheorizing in sociology. Toronto: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  87. Ritzer, G. (2001). Explorations in social theory: From metatheorizing to rationalisation. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  88. Ritzer, G., Zhao, S., & Murphy, J. (2006). Metatheorizing in sociology: The basic parameters and the potential contributions of postmodernism. In J. H. Turner (Ed.), Handbook of sociological theory (pp. 113–134). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  89. Robertson, C. J., & Crittenden, W. F. (2003). Mapping moral philosophies: Strategic implications for multinational firms. Strategic Management Journal, 24(4), 385–392.Google Scholar
  90. Rosen, B. (1975). A meta-theory for ethical theories. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 9(1), 12–23.Google Scholar
  91. Rutherford, M. A., Parks, L., Cavazos, D. E., & White, C. D. (2012). Business ethics as a required course: Investigating the factors impacting the decision to require ethics in the undergraduate business core curriculum. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(2), 174–186.Google Scholar
  92. Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109.Google Scholar
  93. Rychlak, J. F. (1968). A philosophy of science for personality theory. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  94. Saunders, C. S., Carte, T. A., Jasperson, J., & Butler, B. S. (2003). Lessons learned from the trenches of metatriangulation research. Communications of AIS, 2003(11), 245–269.Google Scholar
  95. Scharff, M. M. (2005). WorldCom: A failure of moral and ethical values. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 10(3), 35–47.Google Scholar
  96. Schwartz, M. S. (2005). Universal moral values for corporate codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(1–2), 2–44.Google Scholar
  97. Sekerka, L. E., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). Moral courage in the workplace: Moving to and from the desire and decision to act. Business Ethics: A European Review, 16(2), 132–149.Google Scholar
  98. Shaw, W. H., Barry, V. E., & Sansbury, G. (2009). Moral issues in business (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  99. Singer, M. S. (2000). Ethical and fair work behaviour: A normative–empirical dialogue concerning ethics and justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 28(3), 187–209.Google Scholar
  100. Singer, A. (2010). Strategy as metatheory. Integral Review, 6(3), 57–72.Google Scholar
  101. 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.Google Scholar
  102. Suri, H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395–430.Google Scholar
  103. Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371.Google Scholar
  104. 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), 506–521.Google Scholar
  105. Treviño, L. K. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42(4), 128–142.Google Scholar
  106. Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2010). Managing business ethics (5th ed.). Danvers, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  107. Treviño, L. K., & Weaver, G. R. (1994). Business ethics/business ethics: One field or two? Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(2), 113.Google Scholar
  108. Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A review. Journal of Management, 32(6), 951–990.Google Scholar
  109. Tsoukas, H., & Knudsen, C. (2003). Introduction: The need for meta-theoretical reflection in organization theory. In H. Tsoukas & C. Knudsen (Eds.), The oxford handbook of organization theory: Meta-theoretical perspectives (pp. 1–38). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  110. Tudway, R., & Pascal, A.-M. (2006). Beyond the ivory tower: From business aims to policy making. Public Administration & Development, 26(2), 99–108.Google Scholar
  111. Turner, L. (2003). Bioethics in a multicultural world: Medicine and morality in pluralistic settings. Health Care Analysis, 11(2), 99–117.Google Scholar
  112. Van der Laan, G., Van Ees, H., & Van Witteloostuijn, A. (2008). Corporate social and financial performance: An extended stakeholder theory, and empirical test with accounting measures. Journal of Business Ethics, 79(3), 299–311.Google Scholar
  113. Verhezen, P. (2010). Giving voice in a culture of silence. From a culture of compliance to a culture of integrity. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(2), 187–206.Google Scholar
  114. Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: Research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management, 16(4), 361.Google Scholar
  115. Wallis, S. E. (2010). Toward a science of metatheory. Integral Review, 6(3), 73–120.Google Scholar
  116. Weaver, G. R., & Treviño, L. K. (1994). Normative and empirical business ethics: Separation, marriage of convenience, or marriage of necessity? Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(2), 129.Google Scholar
  117. Wempe, B. (2004). On the use of the social contract model in business ethics. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(4), 332–341.Google Scholar
  118. Werhane, P. H. (1994). The normative/descriptive distinction in methodologies of business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(2), 175.Google Scholar
  119. Werhane, P. (1999). Moral imagination and management decision-making. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  120. Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.Google Scholar
  121. Whittier, N. C., Williams, S., & Dewett, T. C. (2006). Evaluating ethical decision-making models: A review and application. Society and Business Review, 1(3), 235.Google Scholar
  122. Wicks, A. C. (2010). Business ethics: a managerial approach. Boston: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  123. Wittneben, B., Okereke, C., Banerjee, B., & Levy, D. (2009). Climate change and the emergence of new organizational landscapes. Organization Studies, 30(8), 917–919.Google Scholar
  124. Woo, C. (2009, 2010). Press about Giving Voice to Values. Retrieved September 20, 2010, from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business SchoolThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations