Which Duties of Beneficence Should Agents Discharge on Behalf of Principals? A Reflection through Shareholder Primacy
Business Ethics Quarterly 31 (3):421-449 (2021)
AbstractScholars who favor shareholder primacy usually claim either that managers should not fulfill corporate duties of beneficence or that, if they are required to fulfill them, they do so by going against their obligations to shareholders. Distinguishing between structurally different types of duties of beneficence and recognizing the full force of the normative demands imposed on managers reveal that this view needs to be qualified. Although it is correct to think that managers, when acting on behalf of shareholders, are not required to fulfill wide duties of charity, they are nevertheless required to fulfill a variety of narrow duties of beneficence. What is more, the obligation to fulfill these duties arises precisely because they are acting on behalf of shareholders. As such, this article 1) refines our understanding of the duties of corporate beneficence and 2) helps to identify which duties of beneficence are imposed on managers when they are acting on behalf of shareholders.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Philosophical investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein & G. E. M. Anscombe - 1953 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 161:124-124.
Citations of this work
The Peculiar Nature of the Duty to Help During a Pandemic.Santiago Mejia - 2021 - Business Ethics Journal Review 9 (2):8-13.
Similar books and articles
Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’.Samuel Mansell - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 117 (3):583-599.
Weeding Out Flawed Versions of Shareholder Primacy: A Reflection on the Moral Obligations That Carry Over From Principals to Agents.Santiago Mejia - 2019 - Business Ethics Quarterly 29 (4):519-544.
Imperfect Duties, Group Obligations, and Beneficence.S. Andrew Schroeder - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 (5):557-584.
Prospective Duties and the Demands of Beneficence.Chiara Cordelli - 2018 - Ethics 128 (2):373-401.
Non-Libertarianism and Shareholder Theory: A Reply to Schaefer. [REVIEW]Ned Dobos - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 98 (2):273 - 279.
The Demandingness of Beneficence and Kant’s System of Duties.Martin Sticker & Marcel van Ackeren - 2018 - Social Theory and Practice 44 (3):405-436.
Shareholder Primacy, Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Role of Business Schools.N. Craig Smith & David Rönnegard - 2016 - Journal of Business Ethics 134 (3):463-478.
A Funeral March for Those Drowning in Shallow Ponds?: Imperfect Duties and Emergencies.Martin Sticker - 2019 - Kant Studien 110 (2):236-255.
Imperfect Duties and Corporate Philanthropy: A Kantian Approach.David E. Ohreen & Roger A. Petry - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 106 (3):367-381.
Beneficence, Justice, and Health Care.J. Paul Kelleher - 2014 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 24 (1):27-49.
Are Virtues No More Than Dispositions to Obey Moral Rules?Walter E. Schaller - 1990 - Philosophia 20 (1-2):195-207.
A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory.Alexei M. Marcoux - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):1-24.
Moral Entanglements: Ad Hoc Intimacies and Ancillary Duties of Care.Henry S. Richardson - 2012 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (3):376-409.
Shareholder Ownership is Irrelevant for Shareholder Primacy.Hasko von Kriegstein - 2020 - Business Ethics Journal Review 8 (4):20-26.