Ethics in the Board Room

Philosophy in the Contemporary World 10 (1):43-48 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Most contemporary discussions of institutional ethics take contractual rather than fiduciary relations as the model for describing moralresponsibilities, leaving institutional boards with few resources to support and critique their moral behavior. I argue that institutional fiduciary relationships cannot be characterized as contracts, either in fact or function. Each form of relationship privileges a different set of behaviors and values that are far from interchangeable.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Trust and Fiduciary Law.Matthew Harding - 2013 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 33 (1):81-102.
Socially Responsible Investing: Is Your Fiduciary Duty at Risk?William Martin - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (4):549-560.
Fiduciary Duties and Moral Blackmail.Simon Keller - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (2).
Getting Real.Andrew Wicks - 1999 - Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (2):273-293.
Getting Real.Richard Marens & Andrew Wicks - 1999 - Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (2):273-293.
A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory.Alexei M. Marcoux - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):1-24.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-09

Downloads
23 (#664,515)

6 months
2 (#1,232,442)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references