Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Discourse Ethical Perspective on Social Accounting— The Case of the “Global Eight”

  • Chapter
Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensethik

Abstract

Since the turn of the century, social accountability has become a growing area in the field of business ethics (Gray 2002);2001; O’Dwyer 2001; Unerman/ Bennett 2004; Rasche/Esser 2006. Particularly in the international context there has been a proliferation of different concepts providing multinational corporations (MNCs) with ways to systematically assess, measure, and communicate their social and ethical performance (Donaldson 2003); Göbbel/Jonker 2003; Mathews 1997; McIntosh et al. 2003; Tulder/Kolk 2001; Zadek et al. 1997. For the most part, so-called social accounting standards have gained momentum over the last couple of years. In her review, (2003) identifies 32 tools that help firms to cope with the increasing demand for transparency and engage in “social and ethical accounting, auditing, and reporting” (SEAAR, hereafter also simply referred to as “social accounting”). The most well-known examples among these SEAAR standards are the so-called “Global Eight” (McIntosh et al. 2003): (1) the UN Global Compact, (2) the ILO Conventions, (3) the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, (4) the ISO 14001 series, (5) the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), (6) the Global Sullivan Principles, (7) Social Accountability 8000 (SA 8000), and (8) Account Ability 1000 (AA 1000).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abrahamson, E.: Management Fashion. In: Academy of Management Review 21(1), 1996, S. 254–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Account Ability: Stakeholder Engagement Standard. London: Account Ability 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M.; Willmot, H.: Introduction. In: Alvesson, H.; Willmott, H. (Hg.): Studying Management Critically. London: Sage Publications 2003, S. 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnam, M.: Strategische Unternehmensplanung und ethische Reflexion. Sternenfels-Berlin: Brauner 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belal, A.R.: Stakeholder Accountability or Stakeholder Management: A Review of UK Firms’ Social and Ethical Accounting, Auditing, and Reporting (SE AAR) Practices. In: Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 9(1), 2002, S. 8–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A.; Matten, D.: Business Ethies: A European Perspective. Oxford et al: Oxford University Press 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J.: Force of Law: The “Mystical Foundation of Authority”. In: Cornell, D.; Rosenfeld, M.; Carlson, D.G. (Hg.): Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice. New York-London: Routledge 1992, S. 3–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T.: Taking Ethics Seriously—A Mission Now More Possible. In: Academy of Management Review 28(3), 2003, S. 363–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T.; Preston; L.E.: The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation—Concepts, Evidence, and Implications, In: Academy of Management Review 20:1, 1995, S. 65–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, J.G.: Modernity and Morality in Habermas’s Discourse Ethics. In: Inquiry 43(3), 2000, S. 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, J.G.: Habermas. A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E.: Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froomkin, A.M.: Habermas@Discourse.net: Towards a Critical Theory of Cyberspace. In: Harvard Law Review 116(3), 2003, S. 751–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D.U.: Konfliktmanagement in international tätigen Unternehmen. Sternenfels-Berlin: Brauner 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D.U.: Institutionalisierung von Unternehmensethik in internationalen Unternehmen. In: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft 73(1), 2003, S. 25–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D.U.; Behnam, M.; Rasche, A.: Assessing the Impact of Social Standards on Compliance and Integrity-Management in Organizations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Seattle 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D.; Rasche, A.: Discourse Ethies and Social Accountability. The Ethics of SA 8000. In: Business Ethics Quarterly 17(2), 2007, S. 187–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative (GRI): Latest News. In: http://www.globalreporting.org. Accessed May 16, 2006.

  • Göbbels, M.; Jonker, J.: AA1000 and SA8000 Compared: A Systematic Comparison of Contemporary Accountability Standards. In: Managerial Auditing Journal 18(1), 2003, S. 54–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodell, E.: Standards of Corporate Social Responsibility. San Francisco: Social Venture Network 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R.: The Social Accounting Project and Accounting Organizations and Society Privileging Engagement, Imaginings, New Accountings and Pragma tism over Critique? In: Accounting, Organizations and Society 27(7), 2002, S. 687–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R.: Thirty Years of Social Accounting, Reporting and Auditing: What (if anything) Have we Learnt? In: Business Ethies: A European Review 10(1), 2001, S. 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Postmetaphysical Thinking: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Justification and Application. Remarks on Discourse Ethics. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge/MA: Blackwell Publishing 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: The Inclusion of the Other. Studies in Political Theory. Cambridge/MA: Blackwell Publishing 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Kommunikatives Handeln und dezentralisierte Vernunft. Stuttgart: Reclam 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: Wahrheit und Rechtfertigung. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S.L.; Sharma, S.: Engaging Fringe Stakeholders for Competitive Imagination. In: The Academy of Management Executive 18(1), 2004, S. 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J.S.; Freeman, R.E.: Stakeholders, Social Responsibility and Performance—Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Perspectives. In: Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 1999, S. 479–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, J.: Universalizability and Reciprocity in International Business Ethics, In: Business Ethics Quarterly 9(3), 1999, S. 405–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengstmann, R.; Seidel, S.: Banzer Gespräche als internationales Dialogforum etabliert. In: Forum Wirtschaftsethik 13(4), 2005, S. 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, D.: Regulating Corporate Social Performance: A New Look at Social Accounting, Auditing, and Reporting. In: Business Ethics Quarterly 11(2), 2001, S. 307–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, D.C.; McCarthy, T.: Critical Theory. Cambridge/MA: Blackwell Publishing 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Social and Ethical Account Ability (ISEA). AA 1000 Framework—Standards, Guidelines and Professional Qualifications. London: ISEA 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, R.; Bansal, P.: Seeing the Need for ISO 1400. In: Journal of Management Studies 40(4), 2003, S. 1047–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T.M.; Wicks, A.C.: Convergent Stakeholder Theory. In: Academy of Management Review 24(2), 1999, S. 206–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kell, G.: The Global Compact: Selected Experiences and Reflection. In: Journal of Business Ethics 59(1)–2, 2005, S. 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kell, G.; Levin, D.: The Global Compact Network: An Historic Experiment in Learning and Action. In: Business and Society Review 108(2), 2003, S. 151–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostova, T.; Zaheer, S.: Organizational Legitimacy under Conditions of Complexity: The Case of the Multinational Enterprise. In: Academy of Management Review 24(1), 1999, S. 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KPMG: International Survey of Corporate Sustainability Reporting 2002. Maasland: Druckgroep Maasland 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreikebaum, H.; Behnam, M.; Gilbert, D.U.: Management ethischer Konflikte in international tätigen Unternehmen. Wiesbaden: Gabler 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leipziger, D.: The Corporate Responsibility Code Book. Sheffield: Greenleaf 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leipziger, D.: SA 8000. The Definitive Guide to the New Social Standard. London et al.: Prentice 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, J.F.: Proposal for a Model for the Elaboration of Ethical Codes Based on Discourse Ethics. In: Business Ethics: A European Review 10(2), 2001, S. 157–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, M.R.: Twenty-five Years of Social and Environmental Accounting Research: is There a Silver Jubilee to Celebrate? In: Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 10(4), 1997, S. 481–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, T.: Ideals and Illusions: On Reconstruction and Deconstruction in Contemporary Critical Theory. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh, M.; Thomas, R.; Leipziger, D.; Coleman, G.: Living Corporate Citizenship—Strategic Routes to Socially Responsible Business. London et al.: FT Prentice Hall 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R.K.; Agle, B.R.; Wood, D.J.: Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. In: The Academy of Management Review 22(4), 1997, S. 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD): The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Paris: OECD 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B.; Owen, D.L.: Assurance Statement Practice in Environmental, Social and Sustainability Reporting—A Critical Evaluation. In: The British Accounting Review 37(2), 2005, S. 205–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B.: The Legitimacy of Accountant’s Participation in Social and Ethical Accounting, Auditing and Reporting. In: Business Ethics: A European Review 9(2), 2001, S. 86–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, M.: Business, Ethics and Business Ethics: Critical Theory and Negative Dialectics. In: Alvesson, M.; Willmott, H. (Hg.): Studying Management Critically. London: Sage Publications 2003, S. 197–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R.: Stakeholder Theory and Organizational Ethics. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler Publishers 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R.; Freeman, E.R.; Wicks, A.C.: What Stakeholder Theory is not. In: Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4), 2003, S. 479–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, M.; Laughlin, R.: Habermas, Law and Accounting. In: Accounting, Organizations and Society 21(5), 1996, S. 441–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A.; Esser, D.E.: From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability. In: Journal of Business Ethics 65(3), 2006, S. 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, D.: Stakeholder Management Theory: A Critical Theory Perspective. In: Business Ethics Quarterly 9(3), 1999, S. 453–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnebel, E.: Values in Decision-making Processes. Systematic Str ctures of J. Habermas and N. Luhmann for the Appreciation of Responsibility in Leadership. In: Journal of Business Ethics 27(1–2), 2000, S. 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Social Accountability International (SAI): About Social Accountability 8000. In: http://www.saintl.org. Accessed May 16, 2006.

  • Spaemann, R.: Happiness and Benevolence. Notre Dame/London: University of Notre Dame Press 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmann, H.; Scherer, A.G.: Interkulturelles Management zwischen Universalismus und Relativismus. Kritische Anfragen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre an die Philosophie. Diskussionsbeiträge am Lehrstuhl für Allgemeine Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensführung der Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Nr. 88. Erlangen-Nürnberg 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoney, C.; Winstanley, D.: Stakeholding: Confusion or Utopia? Mapping the Conceptual Terrain. In: Journal of Management Studies 38(5), 2001, S. 603–623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M.C.: Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. In: Academy of Management Review 20(3), 1995, S. 571–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talaulicar, T.: Unternehmenskodizes. Typen und Normier ungsstrategien zur Implementierung einer Unternehmensethik. Wiesbaden: DUV 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L.K.; Weaver, G.; Gibson, D.G.; Toffler, B.L.: Managing Ethics and Legal Compliance—What Works and What Hurts. In: California Management Review 41(2), 1999, S. 131–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulder, R.v.; Kolk, A.: Multinationality and Corporate Ethics: Codes of Conduct in the Sporting Goods Industry. In: Journal of International Business Studies 32(2), 2001, S. 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, P.: Integrative Economic Ethics—Towards a Conception of Socio-Economic Rationality. In: Berichte des Instituts für Wirtschaftsethik der Universität St. Gallen Nr. 82. St. Gallen 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, P.: Integrative Wirtschaftsethik. Grundlagen ei ner lebensdienlichen Ökonomie. 3. Auflage. Bern-Stuttgart-Wien: Haupt 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unerman, J.; Bennett, M.: Increased Stakeholder Dialogue and the Internet: Towards Greater Corporate Social Accountability or Reinforcing Capitalist Hegemony? In: Accounting, Organizations and Society 29(7), 2004, S. 685–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S.: Creating Corporate Accountability: Foundational Principles to Make Corporate Citizenship Real. In: Journal of Business Ethics 50(3), 2004, S. 313–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, S.; Weaver, G.: How Internationalization Affects Corporate Ethics: Formal Structures and Informal Management Behavior. In: Journal of International Management 9(1), 2003, S. 75–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, S.K.: Reason and Authority in Habermas: A Critique of Critics. In: The American Political Science Review 74(4), 1980, S. 1007–1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witte, J.M.; Reinicke, W.: Business UNusual. Facilitating United Nations Reform through Partnerships. New York: United Nations 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S.; Pruzan, P.M.; Evans, R.: Building Corporate Accountability: The Emerging Practice of Social & Ethical Accounting, Auditing & Reporting. London: Earthscan Publication 1997.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Dirk Ulrich Gilbert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Rasche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Andreas Georg Scherer Moritz Patzer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr.Th. Gabler | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gilbert, D.U., Rasche, A. (2008). A Discourse Ethical Perspective on Social Accounting— The Case of the “Global Eight”. In: Scherer, A.G., Patzer, M. (eds) Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensethik. Gabler. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8350-5565-0_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation