Business Ethics Quarterly 20 (1):75-88 (2010)
AbstractThis paper explores the influence of social categories on the perceived trade-off between a relatively bad but equal distribution of resources between two parties and a profit maximizing yet unequal one. Studies 1 and 2 showed that people prefer to maximize profitswhen interacting within their social category, but chose not to maximize individual and joint profits when interacting across social categories. Study 3 demonstrated that outside observers, who were not members of the focal social categories, also were less likely to maximize profits when resources were distributed across social category lines. Study 4 showed that the transaction utility of maximizing profits required greater compensation when resources were distributed across, in contrast to within social categories. We discuss the ethical implications of these decision making biases in the context of organizations.
Similar books and articles
The Price of Equality: Suboptimal Resource Allocations Across Social Categories.Stephen M. Garcia, Max H. Bazerman, Shirli Kopelman, Avishalom Tor & Dale T. Miller - 2010 - Business Ethics Quarterly 20 (1):75-88.
Children's Explanations as a Window Into Their Intuitive Theories of the Social World.Marjorie Rhodes - 2014 - Cognitive Science 38 (8):1687-1697.
Decision Theory and Health Resource Allocations.Ruth B. Hoppe - 1983 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 4 (2):193-205.
Race and Place: Social Space in the Production of Human Kinds.Ronald R. Sundstrom - 2003 - Philosophy and Geography 6 (1):83 – 95.
The Construction of Ontological Categories.Jan Westerhoff - 2004 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (4):595 – 620.
Effectiveness of the KLD Social Ratings as a Measure of Workforce Diversity and Corporate Governance.Jingoo Kang - 2015 - Business and Society 54 (5):599-631.
Why Firms Should Not Always Maximize Profits.Ivar Kolstad - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 76 (2):137-145.
Social Categorization Influences Face Perception and Face Memory.Kurt Hugenberg, Steven G. Young, Donald F. Sacco & Michael J. Bernstein - 2011 - In Andy Calder, Gillian Rhodes, Mark Johnson & Jim Haxby (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Face Perception. Oxford University Press.
Cutting Cakes: A Study of Psychologists' Social Categorisations.Jonathan Potter - 1988 - Philosophical Psychology 1 (1):17 – 33.
Making Race Out of Nothing : Psychologically Constrained Social Roles.Ron Mallon & Daniel Kelly - 2012 - In Harold Kincaid (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science. Oxford University Press.
A Framework for Social Ontology.Brian Epstein - 2015 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 46 (2):147-167.
Reasoning with Uncertain Categories.Gregory L. Murphy, Stephanie Y. Chen & Brian H. Ross - 2012 - Thinking and Reasoning 18 (1):81 - 117.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
The Unwitting Accomplice: How Organizations Enable Motivated Reasoning and Self-Serving Behavior.Laura J. Noval & Morela Hernandez - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics 157 (3):699-713.
Reducing Ingroup Bias in Ethical Consumption: The Role of Construal Levels and Social Goodwill.Diego Costa Pinto, Adilson Borges, Márcia Maurer Herter & Mário Boto Ferreira - 2020 - Business Ethics Quarterly 30 (1):31-63.
Experimental Economics as a Method for Normative Business Ethics.Pedro Francés-Gómez, Lorenzo Sacconi & Marco Faillo - 2015 - Business Ethics: A European Review 24:S41-S53.
Ideology as Rationalization and as Self-Righteousness: Psychology and Law as Paths to Critical Business Ethics.Wayne Eastman - 2013 - Business Ethics Quarterly 23 (4):527-560.
References found in this work
The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment.Jonathan Haidt - 2001 - Psychological Review 108 (4):814-834.
Establishing the Role of Empirical Studies of Organizational Justice in Philosophical Inquiries Into Business Ethics.Jerald Greenberg & Robert J. Bies - 1992 - Journal of Business Ethics 11 (5-6):433-444.