Business Ethics A Critical Approach Integrating Ethics Across the Business World 1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan 2024 Scribd Download

Download the full version of the ebook now at ebookultra.
com
Business Ethics A Critical Approach

Integrating Ethics Across the Business World
1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-a-
critical-approach-integrating-ethics-across-the-
business-world-1st-edition-patrick-osullivan/
Explore and download more ebook at https://ebookultra.com

Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.
Business Ethics A Stakeholder and Issues Management

Approach 5th Edition Joseph W. Weiss
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-a-stakeholder-and-
issues-management-approach-5th-edition-joseph-w-weiss/
ebookultra.com
Business Ethics 8th Edition William Shaw
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-8th-edition-william-
shaw/
ebookultra.com
Case Histories in Business Ethics 1st Edition Chris Megone
https://ebookultra.com/download/case-histories-in-business-ethics-1st-
edition-chris-megone/
ebookultra.com
The Economics of Business Valuation Towards a Value

Functional Approach 1st Edition Patrick Anderson
https://ebookultra.com/download/the-economics-of-business-valuation-
towards-a-value-functional-approach-1st-edition-patrick-anderson/
ebookultra.com
Business Ethics in Healthcare Beyond Compliance 1st
Edition Leonard J. Weber
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-in-healthcare-beyond-
compliance-1st-edition-leonard-j-weber/
ebookultra.com
Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society 1st Edition

Robert W. Kolb
https://ebookultra.com/download/encyclopedia-of-business-ethics-and-
society-1st-edition-robert-w-kolb/
ebookultra.com
Business Ethics Policies and Persons 4 ed. Edition Kenneth

E. Goodpaster
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-policies-and-
persons-4-ed-edition-kenneth-e-goodpaster/
ebookultra.com
The Blackwell Guide to Business Ethics Blackwell

Philosophy Guides 1st Edition Norman E. Bowie
https://ebookultra.com/download/the-blackwell-guide-to-business-
ethics-blackwell-philosophy-guides-1st-edition-norman-e-bowie/
ebookultra.com
Business Ethics Case Studies and Selected Readings Sixth

Edition Marianne M. Jennings
https://ebookultra.com/download/business-ethics-case-studies-and-
selected-readings-sixth-edition-marianne-m-jennings/
ebookultra.com
Business Ethics A Critical Approach Integrating Ethics
Across the Business World 1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan
Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Patrick O'Sullivan, Mark Smith, Mark Esposito
ISBN(s): 9780415663588, 041566358X
Edition: 1
File Details: PDF, 2.46 MB
Year: 2012
Language: english
BUSINESS ETHICS
Events such as Trafigura’s illegal dumping of toxic waste in Sierra Leone and BP’s
environmentally disastrous oil spill have highlighted ethical issues in international
business at a time when business leaders, academics and business schools were
reflecting on their own responsibilities following the global financial crisis. The
scope and scale of the global operations of multinational businesses means that
decisions taken in different parts of the world have far-reaching consequences beyond
the national settings where employees are located or where firms are registered
and, as such, an awareness of these responsibilities needs to be integrated into all
levels and all subjects.
Using four guiding principles – a critical multilevel approach rooted in the
tradition of European social theory, a comparative and international perspective,
a global rather than European standpoint, and engaging with subject-specific issues
– this book aims to ‘mainstream’ business ethics into the work of teachers and
students in business schools. This comprehensive volume leverages contributions
from a range of experts to move away from business ethics being a box to be ticked
towards an integrated consideration across the business disciplines.
This impressive book brings ethical considerations back to the heart of the
business curriculum and, in doing so, provides a companion for the progressive
business student throughout their university career.
Patrick O’Sullivan is Professor and Head of Department of People, Organizations

and Society at Grenoble Ecole de Management, France.
Mark Smith is Associate Professor of Human Resource Management at Grenoble

Ecole de Management, France.
Mark Esposito is Associate Professor of Organizational Behaviour and Leadership

at Grenoble Ecole de Management, France.
‘Ethical issues have moved to the forefront of public policy debate following
a series of crises affecting business, finance and government over many years.
These culminated most recently in the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico,
the American subprime crisis and the sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone.
Consequently this provocative and stimulating new book is a welcome
diagnosis of the ethical issues underpinning a wide range of academic
disciplines and subjects that bear on business finance and government in
particular, but also a normative essay on what policies government, regulators
and managers might pursue to avoid these ethical dilemmas in future. While
business ethics has been a Cinderella subject in business schools, this collection
of essays places ethical considerations centre stage for the first time and the
acute analysis will stimulate debate through the innovative range of case studies
at the end of each chapter. Every discerning business school, manager and
bureaucrat should read this book and follow its wise prescriptions.’
Nigel F. B. Allington, Downing College and Centre for Economic
and Public Policy Research, University of Cambridge
‘The authors provide a lively reflection on contemporary business ethics

theory and practice and an original multi-level critique that helps the reader
questioning conventional beliefs in strategic management. They offer a
constructive critique to rethink business models and the managerial mindset
towards responsible capitalism.’
Simone de Colle, Dublin City University, Ireland
‘The gist of this book is a challenge – a challenge to reflect on and to rethink

the role of business in society. The authors of this book pose questions that
are at once inspiring, intriguing, and compellingly urgent.’
Christina Garsten, Stockholm University, Sweden
BUSINESS ETHICS
A critical approach:
integrating ethics across
the business world
Edited by Patrick O’Sullivan,

Mark Smith and Mark Esposito
First published 2012
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2012 Patrick O’Sullivan, Mark Smith and Mark Esposito
The right of the editors to be identified as the authors of the editorial material,
and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance
with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or
reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical,
or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying
and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks
or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification
and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Business ethics: a critical approach integrating ethics across the
business world/edited by Patrick O’Sullivan, Mark Smith,
Mark Esposito. – 1st ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Business ethics. I. O’Sullivan, Patrick. II. Smith, Mark,
1950 June 25– III. Esposito, Mark.
HF5387.B86677 2012
174’.4–dc23
2011048331
ISBN: 978-0-415-66356-4 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-415-66358-8 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-203-11901-3 (ebk)
Typeset in Bembo and Stone Sans by

Florence Production Ltd, Stoodleigh, Devon
CONTENTS
List of illustrations ix
List of contributors xi
Acknowledgements xiii
PART I
Introduction 1
1 Ethics as social critique 3

Patrick O’Sullivan, Mark Smith and Mark Esposito
2 Levels of critique: a methodological framework

for the study of ethics and morality in business 22
Patrick O’Sullivan
3 The ethical management of ethics: fostering ethical

behaviour in corporations 34
Ion Copoeru
PART II
Organizational strategy 47
4 Corporate Social Responsibility, definitional

paralysis and ambiguity 49
Mark Esposito
vi Contents
5 The impact of ethics on the issues of organizational

congruence 60
Lloyd C. Williams and Mark Esposito
6 Ethical issues of reification and recognition in HRM:

a Critical Social Theory perspective 74
Gazi Islam
7 Private vices, business virtues? The institutional strategy

of legitimated online gambling in Italy 86
Carmelo Mazza
PART III
Finance and economics 99
8 The ethical and social dimensions of executive

compensation 101
Terence Tse, Khaled Soufani and Lucie Roux
9 The ethics of the banker: reflections on the banker’s

economic and societal functions, or how history
requires us to reflect on the role of banks in society 118
Sandrine Ansart and Virginie Monvoisin
10 Islamic finance revisited: a brief review with the

Singapore example 134
Habibullah Khan and Omar K. M. R. Bashar
11 Ethical issues in the policy response to the 2008

financial crisis: moral hazard in central banking
and the equity of bailout 147
Alojzy Z. Nowak and Patrick O’Sullivan
PART IV
Organizational behaviour 167
12 Ethics and management: the essential philosophical

and psychological basis of ethical management
driven by a progressive company 169
Loïck Roche
Contents vii
13 Mindfulness as a mediator between the effective

and the ethical manager 179
Dominique Steiler and Raffi Duymedjian
14 A cultural appreciation of diversity of ethical

strategies: examples from European business 191
Taran Patel
15 Employee surveillance and the modern workplace 206

Marko Pitesa
PART V
Marketing and innovation 221
16 Ethics and marketing 223

David Bevan
17 Deeper into the consumer’s mind: market research and ethics 238
Caroline Cuny
18 Social and societal marketing: applications for

public policy makers and companies 254
Carolina O. C. Werle
19 Designing for a better world 267

Josiena Gotzsch
PART VI
HRM and employee relations 285
20 ‘You take the high road . . .’: analysing the ethical

dimensions of high performance work systems 287
Keith Whitfield, Rachel Williams and Sukanya Sengupta
21 Ethical challenges in business coaching 302

Pauline Fatien Diochon
22 Ethical issues for international human resource

management: the case of recruiting the family? 317
Mark Smith and Christelle Tornikoski
viii Contents
23 Competency management: between managerial

development and ethical questioning 332
Pierre-Yves Sanséau
PART VII
The ethical future? 347
24 Epilogue: towards an ethical future for business? 349

Patrick O’Sullivan, Mark Smith and Mark Esposito
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figures
1.1 The three levels of critique 8
9.1 Banking activities and responsibilities 124
9.2 Banking activities and responsibilities in the 2000s 130
11.1 Inflation in the Euro area (annual percentage changes,
non-seasonally adjusted) 158
14.1 Ethical strategies of the four cultures proposed by CT 201
19.1 The plastic bags are selected on colour, cut open, washed
and dried 278
19.2 In a next step the plastic bags are compressed in a thicker,
flexible material 279
19.3 Conserve India handbags 280
19.4 The Chulha stove 282
19.5 Modular structure of the Chulha stove 282
21.1 Typology of clients’ reasons for resorting to business coaching 305
21.2 Main ‘ethical traps’ in the three-party business coaching contracts 312
21.3 Main tensions in the three-party coaching contracts 312
Boxes
1.1 The UN Global Compact for Business 5
17.1 Examples of national marketing deontological codes 240
Tables
3.1 The connection between ethics-related control mechanisms
and management control-system components 37
5.1 The boundaries of sustainability and congruence 61
x Illustrations
7.1 Gross gambling turnover trend 2003–2010 90

7.2 Gambling tax revenues in Italy 2003–2010 95
9.1 What is the banks’ role in the economy? The activities of a
modern bank 121
9.2 What is the banks’ role in the economy? Introduction
of the idea of the societal role 127
11.1 Official financial support to the financial sector up to
February 2009 (in % of GDP) 157
20.1 Godard’s classification of high performance work systems 289
20.2 Boxall and Macky’s classification of high performance
work systems 290
22.1 A typology of recruitment and selection for international
assignments 323
CONTRIBUTORS
Sandrine Ansart, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Omar K. M. R. Bashar, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia
David Bevan, China Europe International Business School, China, and Grenoble
Ecole de Management, France
Ion Copoeru, Babeş-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Caroline Cuny, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Raffi Duymedjian, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Mark Esposito, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France, and Harvard University,

USA
Pauline Fatien Diochon, Menlo College, California, USA, and University of Lyon,
France
Gazi Islam, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Josiena Gotzsch, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Habibullah Khan, U21 Global, Singapore
Carmelo Mazza, IE Business School, Madrid, Spain
Virginie Monvoisin, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

xii Contributors
Alojzy Z. Nowak, Warsaw University, Poland
Patrick O’Sullivan, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Taran Patel, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Marko Pitesa, London Business School, UK, and Grenoble Ecole de Management,
France
Loïck Roche, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Lucie Roux, ESCP Europe, London, UK
Pierre-Yves Sanséau, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Sukanya Sengupta, University of Warwick, UK
Mark Smith, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Khaled Soufani, Concordia University, John Molson School of Business, Canada
Dominique Steiler, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Christelle Tornikoski, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Terence Tse, ESCP Europe, London, UK
Carolina O. C. Werle, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France
Keith Whitfield, University of Cardiff, UK
Lloyd C. Williams, The Institute for Transformative Thought and Learning, USA
Rachel Williams, University of Cardiff, UK

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The editors would like to express their gratitude for the continued support during
the preparation of this work to all those colleagues at Grenoble Ecole de
Management who in various ways contributed to facilitating our task. Special thanks
go to Katiaryna Zhuk for her meticulous and punctual editorial support throughout
the phases of the book and to George Room for his valuable help with the
proofreading and the English translations.
We would also like to send our heartfelt appreciation to our families, for their
support, encouragement, patience and love during these past two years. In
particular, Patrick O’Sullivan would like to dedicate this work to Ola, Mark Esposito
to his loves Alina and Frappy, and Mark Smith to Sarah, Sam and Isabella.
PART I
Introduction
1
ETHICS AS SOCIAL CRITIQUE
Patrick O’Sullivan, Mark Smith
and Mark Esposito
The critical spirit of the age

It is autumn 2011; three years after the dramatic collapse of one of the iconic
investment banks that epitomized an all-conquering financial capitalism, Lehman
Brothers. By now we know that the case of Lehman Brothers was just the tip of
an iceberg, even if no other big banks have been allowed to fail outright. Moreover,
the fallout from the financial crisis and the associated over-indebtedness of
consumers, businesses and governments, and the retrenchment of spending that is
indispensable if that debt burden is to be reduced, have been translated into an
ongoing economic depression from which few corners of the world have been
spared and that has struck particularly violently in those advanced countries that
were the pin-ups of the rampaging financial capitalism of the 1990s: the USA,
Britain and Ireland, as well as in certain countries whose governments had
persistently failed to master spiralling public sector debt (Greece, Portugal).1
Not surprisingly, these dramatic economic events have led to a more deeply
rooted questioning of the whole economic system and of the way in which
businesses behave therein. On the one hand, there has been a real questioning of
the moral acceptability of a whole range of business practices that have contributed
to, or are associated with, the financial crisis: the manner, for example, in which
subprime mortgages2 were sold by brokers on placement commissions to individuals
who realistically never stood a chance of successfully repaying the mortgages and
so were in effect being set up for personal financial disaster; or the manner in which
large bonuses were being paid to bank executives on the basis of positive short-
term results and these bonuses continuing even after the crisis. On the other hand,
the depression has prompted a more profound critical reflection on the merits of
an untrammelled ultraliberal free market capitalism driven by the pursuit of profits
above all else, priding itself on the self-regulatory capacity of markets and derisory
of the state and its interventions in the economic system. It is no exaggeration to
4 P. O’Sullivan, M. Smith and M. Esposito
say that the period from 1990 to 2007 was characterized almost the world over
by a stifling, almost universal, consensus around a politico-economic model of
aggressive profits-driven finance-led free market capitalism in which regulation
of business and state intervention in the economy were being dismantled with a
quasi-religious fervour. This ‘religion’ had a name: the ‘Washington Consensus’.3
None of this consensus today seems so certain. It is in the context of this spirit
of the age to ask some more searching questions regarding business practices and
even of the system itself that we are presenting a new book on business ethics
whose approach is openly and systematically critical in intent. At many points the
shibboleths of the overweening 1990s’ consensus will be mercilessly called into
question. We will be illustrating how the implications of this critical intent
permeate right to the heart of the whole range of business disciplines; how the
considerations of a truly critical approach to business ethics will challenge some of
the central presumptions of strategic management theory, of financial management
and corporate finance, of human resource management, of marketing and, of course,
of political economy.
In addition to its challenge at a theoretical level across a whole range of
disciplines traditionally taught in business schools, this more critical spirit of the
contemporary age has also had a practical manifestation through the Global
Compact of the United Nations. This Compact, dating from 2000, commits signa-
tory businesses (and business schools) to implementation of a more ethical approach
to business in practice (see Box 1.1 for details of the Compact). It is possible to
be cynical about the degree of real impact that the Compact has had but its very
existence is a sign of the times.
Methodology and levels of critique

Before embarking on this comprehensive critical tour it seemed important to stop
to reflect in more detail on the methodological significance and imperatives of the
approach we are proposing; this is also treated in Chapter 2 of the book, which
examines the possible levels of critique within business ethics and their logical
significance and implications in more detail, so here we present just a brief outline.
Although business ethics has been recognized as a separate discipline, at least in
business schools since the mid to late 1980s, it is surprising how little attention has
been paid to its methodological characterization; this is all the more so because of
the presence therein of certain methodological features not found in most of the
other business disciplines. These methodological peculiarities are centred on the
role of business ethics as a critical social discipline, a role that we have just seen is
central to the spirit of the age.
It is true that business ethics could confine itself to a purely descriptive study
of the norms and rules that are, or appear to be, adopted to guide various businesses
in practice. In logical terms, such an approach to business ethics would consist
entirely of positive discourse; that is to say, of propositions that describe facts or
relationships among ideas. Business ethics would simply be a specialist branch of
BOX 1.1 THE UN GLOBAL COMPACT FOR BUSINESS
The UN Global Compact comprises ten principles in the areas of human rights,
labour, the environment and anti-corruption. Drawing upon the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, the International Labour Organization’s Declara-
tion on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the Rio Declaration on
Environment and Development and the United Nations Convention Against
Corruption, the Compact asks ‘companies to embrace, support and enact,
within their sphere of influence, a set of core values in the areas of human
rights, labour standards, the environment and anti-corruption’.
As active stakeholders in the business world, business schools across the world
have also committed themselves to the Compact. In our view this commitment
requires a proactive consideration of ethical issues across all disciplines and
recognition that ethical challenges create tensions between stakeholders,
nationally and internationally, that can be addressed by a critical perspective
developed in volumes such as this one. The ten principles of the Compact follow.
Human rights
• Principle 1: Businesses should support and respect the protection of

internationally proclaimed human rights; and
• Principle 2: make sure that they are not complicit in human rights abuses.
Labour
• Principle 3: Businesses should uphold the freedom of association and the

effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
• Principle 4: the elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour;
• Principle 5: the effective abolition of child labour; and
• Principle 6: the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment
and occupation.
Environment
• Principle 7: Businesses should support a precautionary approach to

environmental challenges;
• Principle 8: undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental
responsibility; and
• Principle 9: encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally
friendly technologies.
Anti-Corruption
• Principle 10: Businesses should work against corruption in all its forms,
including extortion and bribery.
For further details see www.unglobalcompact.org/.

anthropology or comparative cultural studies, and would be thus methodologically

straightforward.
However, such a purely descriptive business ethics would fall far short of the
ambitions of most that have studied, or will study, the subject in the present age.
For if a purpose of the subject is to conduct a social critique, and if that critique
is to yield any practical fruit for the improvement of the world, it will have to
issue, in the end, recommendations for modification, if not revolution, in practical
actions for businesses (and many others in society). Hence, business ethics perforce
will have a normative character; it will embody significant elements of what logicians
classify as normative discourse. Normative discourse outlines not how the world
is but rather how it ought ideally to be, and so it is a statement of ideals in effect.
The full logical import of this distinction of normative from positive discourse will
be elaborated in Chapter 2.
But if business ethics is going to be critical and so normative in character, we
may actually identify a number of distinct ways or levels at which the critique may
be carried out.
Level 1
This is the first step beyond a purely descriptive anthropological-type study where,
in addition to simple description of the rules that govern (or appear to govern)
business activity and managerial decisions, we begin to ask questions of a critical
nature about those rules: are they, in the end, morally acceptable and, if not, what
ought to be the rules that govern business? At this first stage or level, the role that
a business plays in society is not per se called into question: it is simply taken for
granted and the focus is very much on ethical rules within the company, always
geared ultimately to fulfilling the conventionally presumed social role of the
business.4 A corollary question is, of course, on what these normative assertions
regarding how businesses and their managers are to behave are to be based? This
will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 but for now let us note that the
sources could be the conventional morality of a society (but what society?),
religion or moral philosophy.
Level 2
Once we have embarked on a normative investigation as to the rules that govern
how businesses and their managers ought to act and behave, an important distinction
suggests itself. Normative business ethics could be concerned with the rules that
ought to govern the activities of individuals within the business, and this was the
main focus in the early years of business ethics and of American business ethics in
particular. This we have in effect just defined as Level 1 critique. But one could
also raise questions about the moral responsibilities of the company as a whole in
relation to the society or societies in which it operates: this is the sphere of company
social responsibility. If these reflections are truly critical in spirit they will involve
Ethics as social critique 7
calling into question conventional or orthodox views about the role that a company
ought to, or should be expected to, play in a community where it operates. This
brings us to a deeper level of critique whereby the role of the company in society,
rather than being taken for granted or beyond question, is subjected to a searching
critique, and so we find it useful to designate this as Level 2 of critique in business
ethics. A whole host of interesting questions suggest themselves once we begin to
question the social role and contribution of businesses and to probe the critical
normative question of what that role ought ideally to be. Some idea of the breadth
of this discussion (which goes right to the heart of political philosophy and political
economy as well as of ethics) will be given in Chapter 2.
Level 3
There is a third type or level of critical moral reflection that we also think it useful
to distinguish. Once we are dealing with moral issues in international business,
whether at Level 1 (what country’s rules are to be applied within a company that
is doing business in several states) or at Level 2 (differences in the essential view
of the role of business in society in different countries/political philosophies), we
will be forced to consider, at the very least, different moral codes; and where a
multinational company makes a decision in these circumstances it will have, at least
implicitly, decided to apply one or the other of the competing codes (or perhaps,
less likely, some compromise between them). In effect therefore, whether implicitly
or explicitly, the business or its relevant managers will have made a comparison of
codes and decided that for whatever reason one is superior to another and so is to
be applied. What we describe as Level 3 of critique would make this comparative
evaluation of codes fully explicit. Level 3 consists in effect of conducting a
metaethical evaluative comparison, a critical morality of moralities. Here, in the
pursuit of a daunting endeavour to develop some universal rational moral principles,
we seek to evaluate the various different codes with a view to giving rational
guidance as to which code to apply when codes conflict, rather than letting that
decision (because implicit decision at the very least there inevitably will be) be
based on arbitrary unthinking prejudices. Given its metaethical character, it will
be evident that Level 3 is the deepest level of critique within the subject.
The three levels of critique can be represented diagrammatically as in
Figure 1.1.
Business ethics and the tradition of Critical Social Theory

Having delineated this conception of the various levels at which the critiques of
business ethics may be carried out, a parallel clearly suggests itself with the broader
field of ‘Critical Social Theory’; and we would see this work as fitting easily within
this field as one of its subdisciplines. Put very simply, Critical Social Theory refers
to an approach to theorizing in the social sciences that is inherently critical in intent
to the extent that it sees social structures and modes of interaction not simply as
Universal norms for all mankind

C
R Level 3 Critique
Metaethics compares society’s Society 1 Society 2 Society 3
I codes to establish universal social
set of values of mankind
T
I Firm 1 Firm 2 ... Firm n
C
A
Level 2 Critique
L Critique of actions of firms in Society 1 Society 2 Society 3
relation to impact on wider society
E
T Firm 1 Firm 2 .... Firm n
H
I Level 1 Critique
Critique of practices in firms in
C relation to firms declared ethical
Firm 1 Firm 2 ... Firm n
code
S
DESCRIPTIVE No critique of practice

BUSINESS Firm 1 Firm 2 ... Firm n
ETHICS
Legend Denote the possible nature of critique at each level. Thus at Level 1 critique is entirely confined Firm 1
These are the individual firms or
to matters within the firm while at Level 2 alongside critique of internal practice there is also a business units in an economy
critique of the role of business within the wider society(ies) within which it operates. Firm n
FIGURE 1.1 The three levels of critique.
given objective phenomena analogous to the natural objects and phenomena

studied by the physical sciences but also as the carriers of, or as expressions of,
deeply rooted human interests. As a result, it is never enough to understand social
phenomena purely in objective terms because in so doing we will at best partially
understand or at worst totally misunderstand them. We must at all times seek to
unmask/discover the latent subjective dimension, the human interest or interests
that they embody.5 This unmasking of underlying human interests, to the extent
that it invariably also lays bare the intricate power relations among individuals and
social groups, becomes in effect also a critique of social processes. In the hands of
its evident intellectual forebears, Karl Marx and his followers in social theory and
political economy, this critique becomes a ruthless unmasking of ideology and false
consciousness, from the ideological harnessing of social relationships and modes of
interaction to buttressing the narrow dominating interests of ruling classes.
Furthermore, in Marx the critique must issue ultimately (and indeed for Marx
inevitably) in a social revolution in which the dominant class and its ideologies are
overthrown decisively and new modes of social interaction introduced. (The point
after all is to change the world!6)
However, Marx and Marxism, while certainly being the ultimate fons et origo
of the tradition of Critical Social Theory, can today be seen in effect as an extreme
expression of the approach. Contemporary Critical Social Theory does not harbour
quite the same apocalyptic revolutionary flavour as Marx. Nonetheless, Critical
Social Theory does still embody, to a greater or lesser extent, what we may call
the ‘transformational intent’ of its Marxian forebears: the conviction that Critical
Social Theory should culminate in at least insights or recommendations as to
how the world ought to be improved. Put very simply, a critique that is merely
negative or destructive, confining itself simply to showing up what is false or
contradictory or immoral in social systems is stillborn: our social critique must also
in the end be constructive, which is to say that it must put forth suggestions as to
how the world can be changed and improved; in short, normative ethical and
political recommendations for social transformation.
It will be evident that the critical approach to business ethics that we have outlined
above, which through its three levels involves a deepening critique of business
practices and is leading to normative recommendations in respect of these practices,
lies squarely within this transformational tradition and may be conceived as a subfield
of Critical Social Theory.
Ideology unmasked
One particular theme that has been central to all critical social theories is the
unmasking of hidden ideologies. This theme will surface in a number of the chapters
of the book and is its most subversive, or perhaps we should say Socratic, element.7
Whereas in the past the unmasking of ideology and false consciousness has been
largely a prerogative of what may loosely be designated left-wing critics of
capitalism, in this book the critique of ideology will be more even-handed and it
will be seen that both ‘left’ and ‘right’ harbour their own cherished ideologies and
carefully ring-fenced areas of ‘political correctness’, shibboleths that are regarded
as off limits to criticism.
It will be relevant to recall in a little more detail here the conception and role
of ideology in Critical Social Theory and its relationship to what has come to be
known as ‘political correctness’. Tracing its origins to the works of Marx, ideology
refers to sets of propositions constituting a systematic and internally coherent set
of ideas/beliefs8 that are presented as axiomatic or as beyond questioning and that
are widely upheld by certain identifiable social groups. In Marx in particular,
ideologies are seen as performing a key social function in defending the interests
of a ruling class or group; they will be propagated by the ruling class and its media
outlets as propaganda with a view to creating a ‘false consciousness’ in the oppressed
groups or classes. The credo of liberalism or of the American dream has, from the
time of Marx, been seen by many critical theorists as an ideology that serves
the interests of the rich and powerful in capitalist market economies; it holds out
a promise of the opportunity of freedom, material wealth and riches for all in a
system in which these will be the prerogative of a select few and in which the
children of the rich have a huge head start. But, equally, the credo of communism
as propagated in the old Soviet system (and which ironically saw Marx as its
inspiration) can be seen as an ideology that served merely to buttress the positions
of power and privilege of the upper echelons of the Communist party and the
KGB, and which inculcated a manifest false consciousness for the vast bulk of the
impoverished population of the old Soviet empire.
Today, talk of ideology has somewhat receded in polite society but it has
been replaced by a close and equally closed-minded relative: political correctness.
Political correctness again refers to an internally coherent set of beliefs, usually
regarding some rather narrower topic or set of topics than political ideologies; where
once again there is the same unwillingness and even social sanctions against
questioning these beliefs; and where some particular interest group would be
seriously inconvenienced or discomfited by questioning of the beliefs. Precisely
because it is isolated from any serious critical questioning within the society, the
politically correct set of beliefs may in time also become a profound source of false
consciousness. Hence, in the last analysis, positions of political correctness are little
different from ideology as conceived within Critical Social Theory; about the only
significant difference is that ideology is typically a wider set of beliefs constituting
an all-embracing political credo, while political correctness typically refers to
narrower, or often single, issue-sets of beliefs.
In this work, merely ideological claims or supposedly sensitive politically correct
positions will be exposed for what they are, even if in some cases this may seem
politically very incorrect; the spirit of our work is Socratic. No stone will be left
unturned in the relentless pursuit of truth, even if we are fully in agreement with
the great master – that finding and proving truth is fiendishly difficult. In the end,
what other choice has any rational scholar or thinker?9
Examples of this unmasking of ideological positions can be found, for example,
in Chapter 2, where the ideological function of the shareholder wealth maximiza-
tion principle in strategic management literature is examined; in Chapter 4 on
corporate social irresponsibility; in Chapter 16 on the abuse of language in market-
ing, and in a sense also in Chapter 17, when the role of neurosciences in observation
of consumers for marketing purposes is exposed.
How to use this book

One of the key aims of this volume is to promote the consideration and analysis of
ethical issues across all disciplines and in a wider range of courses among business
schools worldwide: in effect, to bring ethics ‘out of the closet’ and into all main-
stream subject areas. Only by doing this do we believe that the ethical challenges
facing business decisions in all functions can be imbued with the high standards called
for by citizens disillusioned by the commercial behaviour of companies and as outlined
in the Global Compact of the United Nations (see p. 5).
Each contributing author, or group of authors, was asked to provide a short

case study or practical illustration to accompany their chapter. These case studies
demonstrate the multidisciplinary nature of ethical challenges faced by businesses
today and bring out one or more of the three levels of critique outlined in this
chapter and developed further in Chapter 2. There is rarely a single answer to the
ethical tensions set out in these case studies and it is possible to argue any number
of a range of ‘solutions’. The preceding text in each chapter will help locate the
themes in the cases and provide a conceptual backdrop for the issues raised. The
international nature of the authors drawn together for this volume provides a wide
array of cases and illustrations that we hope will chime with the personal experiences
of students and allow them to link the issues in the cases to elements of their own
professional lives.
Using an approach recommended by Newell and Scarborough (2002),10 we
propose that students adopt a step-by-step approach to each case. Most of the cases
are accompanied by a series of questions and these can be used to lead you through
the case, or as points for further discussion. The four steps are:
1 Understanding the situation – clearly a good understanding of the issues raised

in each case is vital and the chapter that precedes each case is written and
structured in a way to complement the reading (and rereading) of the case
materials.
2 Defining the problem – identifying the problem in each case is not always
straightforward but is at the heart of developing potential solutions. Try to
find supporting evidence in the case for the problem. The concepts developed
in each chapter will help, as will the knowledge of other elements of the
discipline.
3 Generating and evaluating solutions – in most case studies a single best answer
is rarely available, and this is certainly the case in the materials developed by
the contributors for this volume. Try adopting the different levels of critique,
discussed in this chapter, as a tool to analyse your solutions and predict the
reactions of various stakeholders.
4 Implementing solutions – generating a solution is only part of the way to
completing the case, and implementation is not necessarily straightforward.
Again, the competing views of stakeholders and the three levels of critique
will help identify potential barriers and possible means to implement your ideas.
This step-by-step approach provides a structure for students to work through the
material, as well as one for course leaders to plan the use of these materials and
(we hope) integrate these ethical themes into their courses, whatever the discipline
and whatever their experience of teaching ethics.
This brings us to a summary of the main themes to be covered in the chapters
that follow. Most of the chapters are laid out with an initial essentially dialectical
theoretical treatment of a specific theme followed by a practical illustration or case
study that aims to bring the ethical theory or dilemma to life by showing how it
can arise or has arisen in some very concrete situation for business or government.
The volume does not aim to be a comprehensive treatment of every imaginable
topic in business ethics and there are certain old or new chestnuts on which we
have included nothing at all, for example corruption, whistle-blowing and environ-
mental sustainability questions (although there will be some oblique reference to
these). The range of topics we have chosen for inclusion has been dictated by another
consideration that may be evident from a cursory glance at the table of contents.
In response to a criticism that has increasingly been voiced in the past year
regarding the teaching of business ethics, to the effect that teaching it as a standalone
subject is rather pointless because students and later managers do not readily see
its relevance to the conduct of everyday business, we have wanted to show how
the themes of a critical business ethics, if taken seriously, will actually permeate
into virtually all of the key managerial functions or areas of managerial decision
making. Hence, there are chapters on the implications of ethics for strategic
management, for finance and financial appraisal, for the conduct of the human
resource management function and for the organization of operations, for the
marketing activities of a company and even for design and innovation.
The work as a whole is unified by a critical methodological approach whose
logical foundations are laid out in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 deals with the critical
question of how a company’s ethical policies should themselves be managed in
action. Chapter 4 considers the degree of irresponsibility of which many
contemporary companies are guilty as a way of gauging the importance of the ethical
imperative, while Chapter 5 looks at the importance for the healthy long-term
functioning of any business of achieving a congruence between the ethical values
of the people who make up the business and those of the business as a whole as a
social actor. Chapter 6 will press the critique further to examine and deconstruct
the hidden presuppositions of much of the discourse of business organizations today
to reveal how ingrained is the tendency to reduce human beings in a business context
to being seen as mere objects or things, as human capital or human resource on a
footing little different conceptually from capital equipment. Chapter 7 examines
the role that state regulation can play in conferring moral acceptability to market
activities that otherwise might be seen as morally questionable.
Chapters 8, 9 and 11 deal with a range of ethical issues in banking and finance
that have been thrown up in sharp relief by the recent financial crisis and the state-
sponsored bailouts it necessitated, while Chapter 10 looks at the age-old question
of the morality of usury and the Islamic approach to finance with zero interest
rates. Chapter 12, echoing to a degree Chapter 5, examines the importance of
ethical leadership to the well-being both of the business and of the people working
therein. Chapter 13 continues on this theme of well-being, focusing on the
importance for people to have the space and time for reflection and, in particular,
for ethical reflection within the context of their work life and activity. Chapter
14 looks at the difficulties of ethical decision making, which are posed in a specifically
multinational business context, and the contribution that cultural theory can make
to understanding these.
Chapter 15 examines the currently hotly debated moral issues surrounding privacy
and the surveillance of employees in the workplace, a practice that has grown
exponentially in recent years as a result of certain functional possibilities of
information technologies.
Chapter 16 turns to the area of ethical issues in marketing with an investigation
of the moral uses and abuses of language and communication in the marketing
function, while Chapter 17 examines the morality of some of the uses of
neuroscience that are currently being introduced in marketing and marketing
research. Chapter 18 then looks at the whole field of social marketing, that is to
say, the use of marketing techniques to promote socially or morally desirable practices
by consumers or others. Chapter 19 looks at how ethical considerations can be
introduced into product and service design alongside aesthetic and ergonomic
considerations.
Chapter 20 turns to the moral issues surrounding human resource management
(HRM) and poses the question in a bluntly critical manner of the degree to which
the development of HRM, both in theory, and especially in practice, in recent
years has been compatible with the well-being in the broadest sense of the
workforce, or rather a major source of workforce stress. Chapter 21 examines the
hidden dangers that lurk in the practices of executive coaching, and Chapter 23
looks at some of the ethical issues that can surface when HRM turns to a more
competence-based approach. Chapter 22, having taken a general look at the
manner in which ethical issues are central to the HR function, to the extent that
it deals with human beings, looks at the key ethical issues surrounding recruitment
practices, with particular reference to the international (expatriate) context. The
rhetorical emptiness of much HR discourse will here be exposed.
Finally, since the ultimate aim of a critical approach is to provide recom-
mendations as to how the world may be improved, Chapter 24 will ponder on
the sort of world towards which the diverse critical reflections and normative
recommendations of the volume are pointing.
CASE STUDY: SEIAGUSTUS LTD: IT STINKS
Alek Lychenko, captain of the large oil tanker Petrograd, registered under the
Panamanian flag to the Russian shipping company Volganova Line, breathed a sigh
of relief as his ship made its way into the open waters of the Atlantic Ocean leaving,
by now many nautical miles behind, the port of Freetown in Sierra Leone. His ship
was bound for Gdansk in Poland and its next assignment. He found himself hoping
that his next assignment would be rather less of a depressing saga than that of the
previous five months when the tanker had been under charter to Seiagustus Ltd, a
little known and, as he had discovered, highly secretive UK-based company
specializing in the trading and treatment of oil, chemical products and, especially,
chemical waste. In fact, at many times in the previous months, while either he himself
or his relief captain, Boris Myrgorodski, had been in command, they had found
themselves harbouring serious misgivings about some of the commands that had
come to them from Volgaline head office, but ultimately at the behest of Seiagustus
whose cargo they had been carrying. Much of what they had been asked to do
seemed to them shady and morally rather dubious, even if at no time were they ever
asked to break any laws in the strictest sense. Of course, as seasoned captains, Alek
and Boris had seen a lot and were all too aware of the ambiguities of what passed
as international maritime law; so they had never hesitated to comply with the various
orders regarding the Seiagustus cargo. But, nonetheless, they were both agreed that
they did not feel quite right about the happenings and they hoped the next charter
assignment would not involve Seiagustus or anything like it.
The saga had begun some five months previously when the Petrograd had picked
up, from a Venezuelan refinery, a cargo consisting of coker gasoline (coker naphtha)
which is a by-product of a process involving the pulverization of coke. This by-product
is highly sulphurous but the coker naphtha can be transformed (sweetened) into a
low-grade petroleum spirit that can be very profitably sold on as fuel oil in many
developing countries, even if not in the EU or in other advanced countries. However,
the chemical transformation requires the intensive application of caustic soda to reduce
the sulphuric content of the coker naphtha and, both because of the risks associated
with this potent chemical agent and the disgusting stink the process generates, such
chemical transformation is rarely, if ever, permitted in any of the world’s major ports
or industrial zones. Moreover, the residues or ‘slops’, which would be the resultant,
would contain a cocktail of highly sulphuric compounds and, in particular, high
concentrations of hydrogen sulphide, a nauseous toxic gas. Hydrogen sulphide, if
inhaled in small quantities, causes nausea, skin eruptions and respiratory problems;
in higher quantities it is so repugnant that it can cause nervous system malfunction,
coma and death. Nonetheless, Seiagustus’ London-based traders had calculated that
the profit margin on selling off the low-grade fuel oil after transformation of the
cheaply available Venezuelan coker naphtha was huge, especially in the context of
the then very high prices of fuel oil; each treated tanker load could bring a net return
of some 4 million euros. So if the process could not be carried out on land, why not
carry it out at sea, the brave boys at Seiagustus reckoned; and in this project they
were actively encouraged by the company’s gung-ho chief executive who fully
endorsed their plans. The only trouble was that once the chemical transformation
using caustic soda had been carried out on board there would be the ‘minor matter’
of disposing of the highly toxic slops. Lured by the huge profit margins, Seiagustus
ordered the transformation of the coker naphtha at sea: they would sell the low-
grade fuel at a fat profit and worry about disposal of the residue afterwards.
And so it was that the Petrograd, under the command of Boris Myrgorodski,
made its way across the Atlantic to the Mediterranean where, far from prying eyes
and in the balmy days of the Mediterranean summer, the coker naphtha was
transformed into low-grade petroleum. The sulphur content of this low-grade
petroleum would have been far too high to meet EU environmental standards for
fuel oil but it could easily meet the typical African standards that permit ten times
greater a sulphuric content in petroleum sold for general use. After three months at
sea the low-grade petroleum was unloaded in Tunis and a handsome profit made
by Seiagustus on the deal.
Boris had been told that under no circumstances should he reveal the detailed
origins of the cargo and under no circumstances should he attempt to unload the
slops in Tunis. So the Petrograd set sail into the Mediterranean without cleaning and
a day at sea later came the order from Seiagustus via Volgaline to head for Antwerp
in Belgium. Seiagustus had arranged for the slops to be unloaded and treated by an
authorized local chemical waste disposal facility at the port. Boris was relieved as,
although he did not fully understand their chemical nature, he wanted to get rid of
these toxic and possibly unstable sulphuric slops from his ship as quickly as possible.
Six days later the Petrograd tied up in Antwerp and began the cleaning process,
pumping the slops ashore. However, some six hours into the cleaning process Boris
received a message from an official of the Antwerp port authority to immediately
stop the unloading of the slops. Puzzled, he passed on this message to Volgaline
and Seiagustus who reassured him that all was in order. However, next morning the
manager of the waste treatment facility at the port came on board accompanied
by the port health and safety manager to question the captain about the exact
nature and chemical composition of these slops. They told him that these were no
ordinary slops, that they contained very high concentrations of caustic soda residue
and hydrogen sulphide, and that instead of the usual treatment fee that had been
negotiated by Seiagustus, a fee five times higher would have to be charged to treat
these slops. A somewhat shocked captain relayed the message to Seiagustus
who, after a 24-hour delay, declined to pay such a fee. The port authority, refusing
to bargain over what they clearly saw as highly hazardous slops, ordered that the
slops be pumped back aboard the Petrograd and that the ship should then be allowed
to set sail.
Seiagustus soon sent word that the Petrograd should head for Tallinn in Estonia
where it hoped that it would be able to arrange for cleaning of the ship’s tanks
and disposal of the slops, of whose extra toxic nature Boris was now all too aware.
He did not hold out much hope for the cleaning being carried out in Tallinn if it
had not been done in Antwerp, since Estonia was a member of the European Union,
whose environmental regulations are not only the strictest in the world but also a
supranational competence of the Union and so are applied as a common
EU-wide standard. However, in Tallinn Boris was due to hand over command to his
relief captain, Alek Lychenko, and while rather relieved to be leaving the ship Boris
wondered what exactly to say to Alek, a longstanding colleague. Immediately upon
docking in Tallinn Alek came aboard and, as was customary, they immediately set
about the handover briefing in the seclusion of the captain’s cabin. Boris had
wondered how much he could or should tell Alek. After all, he had been told to
maintain a strict secrecy about the off-shore conversion process of the coker naphtha
that had been carried out in the Mediterranean and he was fairly sure that Alek would
not have been briefed about this either by Volgaline or by Seiagustus. At the same
time, he felt a duty of loyalty to his colleague and long-time acquaintance to let him
know just how tricky the coming period of command was likely to be for Alek, what
with the need to dispose of the ultra toxic slops whose real nature Boris had known
since the call at Antwerp. While Alek expressed dismay, even as an old sea dog he
was hugely grateful to Boris for having come clean with him about the nature of the
slops; and when later Boris had gone ashore and left the ship for his leave period,
Alek sat up late into the night in his cabin wondering what might be about to happen.
He had an awful sense of foreboding of evil that he sought in vain to fight back.
That foreboding was borne out the next day as the Tallinn port authorities also
declined to accept the Petrograd slops. After some days alongside, the order eventually
came to Alek to set sail for West Africa. As the Petrograd made its way out of the
Baltic, then into the North Sea and the English Channel and finally out into the Atlantic
Ocean there was complete silence from Seiagustus and from Volgaline regarding the
eventual destination in West Africa. As the ship passed abeam Dakar and the Cape
Verde islands Alek decided to take the initiative and to ask for instructions from
Volgaline as to where to head; meanwhile, he cut back on the engines and allowed
the ship to proceed lazily at about 10 knots down along the West African coastline
but in international waters. After two days the order came to sail towards Port Harcourt
in Nigeria for a rendezvous off the Nigerian coast in that area with some barges that
would take the slops and dispose of them in Nigeria. Alek wondered what might be
their ultimate destination: dumping at sea by the barges or secretly in the already-
polluted equatorial forest areas in the Niger delta. However, as the ship passed abeam
Accra in Ghana, fresh orders came to make an about turn and to head back towards
Freetown in Sierra Leone where arrangements were being made for discharge of the
slops in the port of Freetown.
Seiagustus had indeed been active. The company had for many years been present
in west and central Africa, involved in oil and chemicals trading there, and had built
up a formidable network of political connections and privileges. Although it was
whispered locally that its undoubted political influence and privilege were the result of
the generous bribery of local politicians in these very poor states, Seiagustus was a highly
discreet and secretive company, and no hint of such bribery had ever been documented
or reported in Europe. Using its contacts and influence, Seiagustus had been able to
arrange for a newly formed local waste disposal company, Teodoro CT, to take the toxic
slops from the ship and dispose of them. When Alek was finally told a day later, when
the ship was about 12 hours from Freetown, that the slops were to be transferred to a
fleet of tanker lorries from Teodoro CT he was at first greatly relieved that he would at
last be shot of them; but as the hours passed and the contours of the coastline became
sharper on the approach to Freetown he could not but wonder what was going to
happen to these slops once on the lorries. After all, in Antwerp, there had been a high-
security disposal facility but even there they would only have been prepared to deal
with the stuff for five times the normal rate. Alek shuddered to think of the degree of
sophistication or safety precautions that might prevail in the disposal facilities in Sierra
Leone, a very much less developed country than Belgium.
The Petrograd entered the port of Freetown and tied up at 16:30. Within 30
minutes, Babatunde Ogunoku, a local man and director of Teodoro CT, was on board
together with the port Customs team to confirm that the fleet of lorries would be
ready to begin taking the slops at 19:00. Alek was amazed at this uncustomary
efficiency and zeal to get the job done in this part of the world but, given how keen
he was to get rid of his toxic cargo, he was more than happy to go along, mustering
his crew (who had rather been hoping for a night in Freetown after weeks at sea)
for immediate discharge of the slops. And so it was that at 19:15 the first tanker
lorries arrived to take the toxic slops. From the bridge Alek watched as the tanker
lorries drove off into the night and away from the port area towards the city of
Freetown. He was rather surprised, as he had expected that the lorries would be
transferring the slops to some sort of facility in the port area, but not knowing much
about the area he concluded that there must obviously have been some new
chemical waste treatment facility elsewhere in the city or in its hinterland. At least,
he thought to himself, the slops are being taken inland and there was no question
of dumping them at sea – more than could be said of his fears of what might have
happened if the slops had been offloaded onto barges off the Nigerian coast.
The first mate, Petru Popa, a gregarious and good-natured young Moldovan who
had joined Volgaline two years before, asked Alek if he could leave the ship for a few
hours to go into Freetown for a night out together with the second mate, Sergei
Mihailova. Since they had been for weeks at sea, and as deck officers not directly
required to oversee the discharge, and since Alek knew that he would be unlikely to
sleep until the operation of discharge had been completed, he agreed to let the two
men go up town. After all, he alone of the crew knew the dark secret of the truly
toxic nature of the slops, so it would have not only been churlish but also suspicious
if he had refused the request.
At 21:00, Petru and Sergei left the ship in high spirits and took a taxi from the
port gates, asking the taxi driver to take them first towards some good local eating
establishments, preferably in a lively part of town close to nightclubs so that they
could treat themselves to some after-dinner rest and recreation. While sampling the
local cuisine in a very basic eating establishment on the side of the street, the men
could not but notice a growing disgusting smell that reminded them of rotten eggs,
and this smell seemed to intensify when the wind blew. Having originally put it down
to malfunctioning drains or sewers, they were puzzled as to why the stench increased
when the wind blew. But this being a poor African country they did not give the
matter too much thought and soon they were on their way to a local bar that had
been recommended by the taxi driver for post-prandial relaxation. They were relieved
to get inside the poorly ventilated bar with its strong smell of alcohol and human
sweat and to escape the increasingly nauseous smell outside. In any case, as the local
girls queued up to flirt with them in the dimly lit bar, all thoughts of the outside
world receded. After some 30 minutes, a very tall lithe local girl whom Petru could
not but notice came into the bar in an apparently very agitated state and made her
way towards the toilets. When she emerged some three minutes later she huddled
in a conversation with four of the other girls and two big local men whose role Petru
could only assume was to protect the girls in the bar. After some five minutes of
animated conversation one of the local men left the bar while the beautiful tall girl
again went to the toilets. When she emerged, Petru noted to his delight that she
had changed into brightly alluring clothes and had applied make-up. As she walked
towards the centre of the bar she looked to him like a top European fashion model
and he could not resist getting up and making his way to talk to her. She introduced
herself as Soraya and allowed the charming Petru to buy her a drink.
Later, as they were relaxing and talking, Petru warmed hugely to this beautiful
and very directly spoken local girl who told him of the poverty of her family, her
mother and three younger siblings and how her bar work helped handsomely to
feed and keep the whole family. So, without wishing to be too personal, he decided
to ask Soraya why she had been so agitated when she had come into the bar earlier.
She told him that she had had an extremely unpleasant experience earlier in the
evening. In the slum area of the city where she lived with her family, at about 20:30
there had suddenly been an outbreak of an extremely foul and all-pervasive stink
that had quickly led to extreme nausea and was affecting everybody in the slum area
where she lived. Everyone was complaining of burning eyes and many people were
vomiting; a few young children had apparently lost consciousness. It appeared, but
Soraya could not be sure of this, that the stink was coming from a nearby open city
rubbish dump. She said that this never smelled good but from 20:30 this evening
the stink from the dump had suddenly become overpowering and totally nauseous.
The slum dwellers were talking about some tanker lorries that had come to the dump
just before the outbreak of the stink . . . Soraya said that the reason she had gone
immediately to the toilets on arrival at the bar was that she herself had been so
nauseated that she had had repeated vomiting attacks, including a last one in the
toilets. Asked if the smell was reminiscent of rotten eggs Soraya confirmed this and
Petru remarked that he and Sergei had noticed a similar smell outside earlier but
nothing like as strong as it appeared to have been in Soraya’s neighbourhood.
Some three hours later, Petru reluctantly left the beautiful Soraya and, having
located his second mate Sergei, the men made their way back to the ship. There
being no taxis available they decided to walk and, as they did so, that same nauseous
rotten egg smell hung in the air. When they arrived at the ship Sergei asked to be
promptly excused and went to his cabin where he was violently ill. Petru, on the
other hand, who was not feeling quite so nauseous after the 45-minute walk back
from town, went to announce his return to Alek to relay some of the evenings
happenings to him. Without going into too much of the detail, he spoke of the smell
and of the strange story of the open dump and immediate outbreak of nausea in
the slum area that had been recounted by the lovely local girl, Soraya. Petru was
struck by the grim impassivity of Alek’s look as he told the tale. On other such
occasions there would have been ribald exchanges about the delights and charms
of the local girls, but this evening Alek barely managed a wry smile as Petru described
Soraya. He concluded that this was not the time to talk to Alek, who obviously had
something on his mind, and so Petru fairly quickly withdrew to his own cabin suffering
by now from quite a throbbing headache that he put down to some of the local
spirits he had been drinking before Soraya had engaged his whole attention. In
minutes he was in a deep sleep . . .
Alek by contrast could not possibly sleep. He went up to the bridge to see how
advanced was the discharge and noticed that there were still some of the tanker
lorries of Teodoro CT taking the slops. He went onto the open-air bridge wing and
sniffed the air. There in the port, and owing to the breeze blowing in off the ocean,
the smell was predominantly of sea air mixed with diesel fumes but there was also
an unmistakable hint of the rotten egg smell described by Petru, especially in
moments when the sea breeze lulled. He paced the bridge for some minutes, then
radioed the engineers on the decks below to ask how soon before the discharge and
cleaning would be complete. A further three hours, they informed him. He curtly
told them to expedite. He went to his cabin but there was no question of sleep: for
Alek had by now understood more or less exactly what was happening. The toxic
slops were being taken from the ship in tanker lorries and simply being dumped in
open rubbish tips around Freetown. He was indignant, furious, outraged.
Thoughts raced through his mind. Should he call the harbour master to warn
him of the dangers? Well, no, probably not, because in this part of the world the
harbour master had almost certainly been paid off by Teodoro CT, if not by Seiagustus
who had a reputation for discreet ‘facilitation payments’ and corruption in the region.
Should he call Seiagustus to protest? Hardly . . . given their track record they would
probably just laugh at him and tell him to grow up. Or then again, they might offer
him some money to keep quiet. But while Alek was not beyond taking a little
sweetener to turn a blind eye on occasions, this was different: apparently serious and
widespread human suffering was involved and it was not simply about payment to
be discreet over some minor misdemeanour. So no use talking to Seiagustus.
He thought of calling Boris to tell him the turn of events, but what good would
that do? What could Boris do?
He thought of calling Volgaline, but if he recounted a tale like this they would
either take him to be drunk and delirious on some local opiate or, if they knew about
the real nature of the cargo, they would probably relieve him permanently of
command in the near future.
Alek even thought of calling his lovely Mexican girlfriend whom he had met on
an earlier voyage and who always cheered him up; but tonight he would feel dirty
if he called her, and what would she think of him if he told her what was happening.
Perhaps he could go to the press on his return to Europe out of a sense of moral
duty to reveal the scandal of such open dumping of toxic wastes high in hydrogen
sulphide on a poor unsuspecting and utterly unprepared population. The more he
thought about it the more immoral and unconscionable the whole episode seemed.
So, although if it were to come out that he was the one who had talked to the press
he could expect at the least to lose his job with Volgaline, if not be in fear for his
life, Alek resolved that once this voyage was over he would go to the press with the
full story.
That resolution reached after an hour of struggle with his conscience, Alek felt
slightly better. He even considered talking to the press straight away but he thought
that that could point the finger too easily to himself as the source of the leaked
information, and as the discharge of the slops was almost complete, the damage
had by now been done.
Having made this internal decision, Alek fell into a deep but fitful sleep for about
an hour, which was interrupted when Petru came to his cabin to say that the discharge
and cleaning were complete and that they were ready to set sail for Europe. It was
07:00, just after sunrise. Petru looked pale and drawn and Alek asked if he was OK.
Petru cursed the local alcohol, which he said had left him with a stinging hangover
and vomiting during the night. Alek quipped about being a lightweight but Petru
said that Sergei was apparently feeling equally bad. So Alek said that he would take
command not only as the ship left port but also for the first part of the voyage up to
16:00, leaving Petru to recover in his cabin.
Alek now became almost hyperactive despite the short and fitful sleep he had
managed just before dawn. He now wanted to be out of Freetown just as quickly as
possible. He checked on the refuelling situation with the engineers who said that
they could be ready for a 09:30 departure after bunkering. He contacted the harbour
master and Customs to announce their imminent departure and somewhat to his
surprise they were on board within 30 minutes signing the relevant pre-departure
paperwork. He contacted Volgaline to announce their departure and this was
promptly acknowledged with an order to proceed to Gdansk in Poland where Alek
would be relieved of command and could go ashore on leave. By 09:45 the ropes
were being let go and the Petrograd made its way as briskly as was feasible out of
the port area of Freetown into the open waters of the Atlantic heading northwards
towards Europe. Alek sat or paced pensively on the bridge, struck as never before
by the purity of the deep blue of the tropical waters. He noticed the towering patches
of cumulonimbus clouds that develop with the heat of the day as a backdrop, and
which can produce the most spectacular of thunderstorms . . . The symbols tumbled
through his mind: the purity of the ocean contrasted with mankind’s pollution of
the face of the earth, the thunderstorm of the reaction which his revelations to the
press would cause. He was glad about the upcoming leave when he would at last
have the chance to relieve himself of the moral burden he was secretly carrying by
speaking to the press . . .
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION ON THE CASE STUDY
1 Is it morally acceptable for advanced country businesses to exploit differences

in local laws or in the application of local laws to reduce costs in the disposal
of toxic wastes?
2 Seiagustus Ltd might well claim in its defence that despite having disposed of
a fairly toxic cargo to cut costs in Freetown it had also in the past made a big
contribution to the economy of the region through its activities in the materials
extraction and trading sector. Is this a morally relevant defence of their actions?
3 If you think that there are morally unacceptable actions involved in the case
study, whom do you think bears or shares the moral guilt for them?
4 If you were Alek Lychenko what would you have done?
Notes
1 As measured by real GDP for the last quarter of 2008 and the first three quarters of 2009,
GDP growth rates as follows were recorded.
USA: –1.7%, –1.2%, –0.2% +0.4%.
Britain: –2.1%, –2.3%, –0.7%, –0.3%.
Ireland: –4.8%, –2.5%, –0.3%, –0.2% (and –2.7% in the fourth quarter of 2009!).
Negative growth means outright contraction of the level of economic activity and so
depression. Source: OECD Quarterly National Accounts statistics, http://stats.oecd.org/
index.aspx?queryid=350 (accesssed 23/08/2010).
2 Subprime mortgages were mortgages sold to borrowers who hitherto (prior to 2000)
would have been regarded as completely unworthy of credit, in some cases, NINJAs:
no income, no job or assets. The phenomenon was widespread in the US but the UK
and Ireland were not immune to it either.
3 So called because from the early 1990s certain leading world-level institutions based in
Washington had come to a consensus view that economic development required a
dismantling of extensive state regulation and a climate that would foster the development
of indigenous business enterprise in poorer countries. This view is not without its merits,
in particular given the evidence that trade (export-led growth) is in the long term more
effective than direct aid; but encouraged by the fall of the Soviet system the position
became a crusade against all forms of government intervention and state regulation.
4 In Western capitalist societies the role of business is supposed to be to make as much
profit as possible as in so doing businesses are led ‘as if by an invisible hand’ (Smith, 1776)
to promote the well-being of the society as a whole. On all of this, see Chapter 2,
p. 26–27 and Adam Smith (1776), The Wealth of Nations, London: Methuen. See Book
IV Chapter 2, p. 29.
5 For further elaboration on these themes there is a vast literature. On Critical Social Theory
there is the whole literature of the Frankfurt School whose crowning achievement could
be considered to be J. Habermas (1972), Knowledge and Human Interests, London:
Heinemann. On the inescapable subjectivity of human action and interaction see Patrick
O’Sullivan (1987) Economic Methodology and Freedom to Choose, London: Allen and Unwin,
Chapters 4, 12 and 13; also the whole literature of Austrian economic methodology.
6 In Marx’s famous phrase, ‘Philosophers have sought to interpret the world: the point
however is to change it’.
7 Socratic, because of course Socrates’ dialectical method of constantly probing and
criticizing received opinion in the relentless pursuit of truth was regarded in the end as
highly subversive by the Athenians; the fact that Socrates was practising this method with
the young and thus subverting them led eventually to his execution.
8 Ideo-logy means literally a logically related set of ideas; hence it is certainly internally
coherent. The problem comes when the ideology is to be related to reality and when
some of its axioms may prove to be unfounded or untrue.
9 On all of this see O’Sullivan, Economic Methodology and Freedom to Choose, Chapter 1.
I have argued there in some detail that pursuit of truth is the only possible ultimate goal
of rational enquiry, and that as academic scholars we cannot but be rational. After all,
could you even begin to understand what I am writing and seeking to communicate if
what I say were to be totally and systematically irrational?
10 Helen Newell and Harry Scarborough (eds) (2002), Human Resource Management in
Context: A Case Study Approach. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
2
LEVELS OF CRITIQUE
A methodological framework for
the study of ethics and morality
in business
Patrick O’Sullivan
In the introductory chapter reference has been made to the fact that when we
speak of a critical approach in the study of business ethics this can be taken in a
number of different ways. It can mean anything from a simple aim of reaching
some normative as well as purely positive/descriptive conclusions regarding various
practices of business to an in-depth critical evaluation of the role of business in
society to a critical transcendental comparison of competing moral codes. The
purpose of this chapter is to set out in a systematic manner these different levels
at which a critique in the ethics and morality of business can be pitched. This is
then intended to form a methodological framework within which the reflective
essays in the rest of the volume will be developed.
There has for some time been an awareness that there are differences in the
way in which the subject is viewed between theorists in different parts of the world.
Crane and Matten1 in their well-known textbook have pointed out a systematic
set of differences between a North American and a European approach to business
ethics. New writings in the subject from less developed parts of the world are also
bringing new perspectives on old topics. This new kaleidoscope of perspectives,
while certainly enriching the subject, has brought with it a range of methodological
questions that to date have been barely touched upon in the literature of the subject.
Many of these questions surround the level at which the critiques of business ethics
are to be conducted. For example Crane and Matten2 have noted that whereas
North American business ethics has been very much concerned with the conduct
of individuals (employees and managers) within companies, European business ethics
has tended to focus more on the role and moral responsibilities of the company
as a whole in relation to the society in which it is located and does business. The
primary aim of this chapter is to set out the methodological issues as to levels of
critique in a systematic fashion; to reflect upon them with a view to giving business
ethics a critical methodological foundation; and then to investigate the implications
Levels of critique: a methodological framework 23
of this critical methodology in a range of particular applications to business ethics

issues and cases.
The starting point of our reflections on the differences in approach and on their
methodological implications is, then, recognition that there are very different levels
of critique, of critical reflection at which the study of business ethics may be
conducted. We may begin therefore from a systematic outline of these different
levels at which the critical reflections of business ethics may be pitched.
Level 1
At the most basic level there is the contrast between what may be called a positive
and a normative approach to the subject in the sense of modal logic. In modal
logic, positive discourse is that which simply records facts, states of affairs or
relationships among ideas: for example 15 August 2009 was a Saturday, 2 + 3 ⫽
5, etc. Normative discourse by contrast outlines how the world ought ideally to
be; it is a statement of ideals. Normative discourse is thus centrally present in
discussions of all ethics and political philosophy to the extent that both of these
are concerned with views of how people ought ideally to behave for a better world
to be possible. Hence in one very basic sense normative discourse will inevitably
be encountered in business ethics to the extent that it will be concerned with
questions of how businesses and/or people in business ought ideally to behave.
But if business ethics will be to a large extent a study about norms in business
we can still recognize two quite logically distinct ways in which this study might
be carried out: we could conduct a purely positive description and analysis of the
norms that actually govern business actions in various companies and in various
contexts; and from a methodological standpoint this would be a positive business
ethics. Such an approach is entirely uncritical in relation to business practices and
so in effect does not even begin to develop critique.
On the other hand, we could also envisage a methodologically normative
approach to business ethics in which we investigate not so much the norms that
actually govern the behaviour of businesses as the norms/ethical principles that ought
to govern business activity, either in general or in particular contexts. It will be
evident that this second approach begins to develop a degree of critique insofar as
it is prepared not just to accept as given whatever may be the declared or supposed
ethical principles that businesses proclaim but also to subject those principles to a
searching critique.3 This is what we shall label as the first level of critique (Level
1 critique in what follows).
A corollary question that arises if we say that we wish to conduct a
methodologically normative business ethics is whence are the normative principles
to come that we will use as the basis of deciding what ethical principles a business
ought to adopt. The simple answer is that there are a variety of possible sources
ranging from conventional shared moralities in certain societies through religious
bases to humanism and moral philosophy. This last we conceive as the systematic
academic study of moral principles. However, in moral philosophy we will often
24 Patrick O’Sullivan
pass to a different level of critique (the critical morality of moralities), which will
be dealt with below as Level 3 of critique. For now let us simply note that a business
ethics that confined itself purely to the positive study of the ethical principles that
companies supposedly follow would be relatively superficial and uninteresting by
comparison with a methodologically normative study in which the ethical principles
themselves and the behaviour of the business in respect of these are questioned in
depth.
Level 2
A second key distinction in respect of the levels at which critique may be carried
out in business ethics is that between the moral appraisal of the actions of individuals
within a company, and moral appraisal of the actions and the stance of the
company in relation to society at large or to the community(ies) in which a company
is situated. This distinction is logically independent of the first level distinction just
made, in the sense that we could envisage studying the actions of individuals within
a company in either a positive or a normative way; and we could equally study
the stance of a company in relation to the wider community in either a positive
or a normative fashion. The distinction could be said to be more about the scope
rather than level of critique; but since an approach to business ethics that combines
a moral appraisal of the actions of individuals within a company with a simultaneous
appraisal of the role of the company in relation to the community represents a
much more searching critique in which, as argued below, far less is taken for granted,
we have designated this distinction as also a distinction of level of critique.
Therefore a critical business ethics that includes a critical discussion of the role that
a company ought to play in relation to society we shall designate as Level 2 critique.
For many of the earliest writers on the subject, especially in North America,
business ethics was essentially confined to a study of how individuals (both
managers and employees) should behave within a company. Much ink was spilled
on questions such as the ethics of pilfering, of internal whistle-blowing, of racial
discrimination, sexual harassment and bullying, and on salary issues. The only parties
outside the company who figured were the customers, insofar as there could be
moral issues regarding how company employees dealt with or marketed to
customers.
In this approach the role of the company as a collective entity in relation to
the community is simply not questioned in any critical manner: in effect therefore
it takes for granted as something beyond question the role that a business is playing
within the society wherein it is located.
Continental European writers (and some of the more strident North American
critics) on business ethics, by contrast, have been much more prepared to call into
question the role that a business plays within a community and indeed to insist
that the most important issues of business ethics concern precisely questions of the
role of the business in the wider community.4 The most obvious example of this
latter of course is the concern for the ecological environmental impacts of business
activity, but other themes such as cultural imperialism/insensitivity, responsibilities

in respect of exploitation of labour (especially use of child labour), alleviation of
poverty, adoption of ‘corrupt’ practices and the whole field of stakeholder theory
may be mentioned.
If business ethics were to be confined purely to a positive study of the
moral/ethical principles that actually appear to guide the actions of individuals
within companies then it might be vaguely plausible to rule out consideration of
the moral responsibility of a company in relation to the wider community in which
it is located. But, as already suggested, such a purely positive business ethics, as well
as being hopelessly uncritical, would be relatively uninteresting by comparison with
a methodologically normative business ethics embodying at least Level 1 critique.
But the moment we embark on a methodologically normative business ethics with
Level 1 critique in relation to actual practices it is inevitable that this will culminate
in a questioning of the most appropriate role for business in the community. Why
should the critique necessarily stop, so to speak, at the frontiers of the firm?
In fact, for the theorists for whom any critique is thus stopped from consideration
of the role that a business ought to play in society or the wider community, it is
evident that the reason for this unwillingness to probe further is ultimately
ideological in character; that is to say that these theorists are effectively presuming
a certain predefined role or stance of business in relation to society as a sort of
article of faith which it is not for business ethics to question or to criticize. Almost
invariably this ideological stance is some form of unreconstructed faith in the
beneficence of a capitalist market system whereby it is believed that by ruthlessly
pursuing the company’s own narrow self-interest (in turn interpreted as the
maximization of profit for shareholders5) the business will thereby automatically
be fulfilling the only social responsibility it has; it will ‘as if by an invisible hand’6
be contributing to the achievement of an end that was no part of its purpose, namely
the well-being of the whole society.
Nonetheless, it would be easy to imagine an analogous stance in respect of the
critique of business role in relation to society arising also in a centrally planned
economy. Indeed, in such economies as have in practice been close to the centrally
planned system there has been the very same unwillingness to call into question
the prevailing fundamental ideological view of the appropriate role of business (or
of production entities) in society in such a centrally planned system. The old Soviet
communist system is a clear example; any serious critique of the prevailing
economic system and of the role of state companies therein was discouraged and
stifled.
Thus, ideological blinkers that prevent business ethics from carrying to its full
and mature conclusion the normative critique of business practices are by no means
the sole prerogative just of capitalist apologists on the one hand or of central planning
apologists on the other: to a mature methodologically normative business ethics
both positions are ‘ideological’ insofar as they shut down critique of the practices
of business at a certain level and are unwilling to confront critical questions
regarding the role of business in society.
It is emphatically our view in this work that the critiques of a methodologically

normative business ethics must be carried through courageously to their fullest logical
conclusion; no areas are to be fenced off from consideration of the probing
critique for merely ideological reasons. Hence the critiques of business ethics will
extend here to a questioning also of the most appropriate role for a business to
play in a society; and the view of a company’s social responsibility will go well
beyond the idea that a company’s social responsibility is entirely fulfilled through
the maximization of profits (in a capitalist market system) or through the attainment
of central plan targets (in a centrally planned context).
It may be useful already to make a brief reference to certain capitalist apologists
whose views on this question have been highly influential throughout the high
tide of faith in market systems during the period 1990–2008.7 We may consider
in the first place the pronouncements on this topic by Milton Friedman, particularly
from his much-quoted 1970 article ‘The social responsibility of a business is to
increase its profits’.8 Friedman’s central thesis is clearly expressed in the title of the
article: as he sees things, most businesses take the form of limited companies that
possess a legal personality but are not to be considered as moral agents in themselves.
The only moral agents are the individuals working within the company, in
particular the managers who are charged with decision-taking; and their sole moral
responsibility is identified by Friedman with their overriding legal responsibility
to act in the best interests of shareholders. This in turn is interpreted at least by
Friedman (but also by an extensive subsequent literature in management theory)
as managers acting to maximize shareholder wealth; or since shareholder wealth
will be a direct function of the expected profitability of a company, simple profit
maximization.9 That is then seen as the ultimate limit of the social responsibility
of a company. It is not for the company to take upon itself caring about any other
social problems; that is seen to be the job of elected politicians who may wish to
apply certain regulations to the activities of business.
Friedman’s views have been hugely influential especially in North American
business schools and in American business practice. Yet, on reflection it can be
seen to be highly challengeable on a number of key points. First of all, the idea
that a company can have a legal personality but no moral responsibilities as a
collective entity seems obtuse. One of the most fundamental principles of fairness
in jurisprudence is that with rights go duties/responsibilities; hence a company can
and indeed should have certain legal responsibilities. But if there are to be legal
responsibilities why not also moral responsibilities?
Second, Friedman identifies the moral responsibilities with their legal
responsibilities; yet it is well known that these do not necessarily coincide, otherwise
how would it be possible to identify ‘bad’ laws, that is, laws that on moral grounds
ought to be changed/different.
Third, there is the identification by Friedman of the interests of shareholders
as profit maximization; and of this therefore as the sole and overriding goal and
social role of any business. Here the nature of his position as a simple apologist for
capitalism is laid bare. After all, who ever decreed morally that companies should
be run exclusively for the benefit of, and in the interests of, shareholders? Simply
to argue that this is legally the case is only to reveal all too obviously what Marx
had understood a century before Friedman: that the legal system in a state is simply
an apparatus to serve the interests of the ruling class. For let us be honest about
this: why not have a system where businesses are run to serve the interests of
consumers rather than shareholders or of workers rather than shareholders (as Marx
had in effect argued); or even a system that legally (and morally) requires businesses
to be run in the interests of a range of different stakeholder groups in a kind of
simultaneous trade-off?
Finally, by way of critique of Friedman, it may be asked whether or not today’s
shareholders at any rate are exclusively interested in profits. It is patently obvious
that this is true neither of individual or even of institutional shareholders; the
phenomena of the ethical shareholder or ethical investment fund are very much
with us and probably growing in importance if anything, even as there are also
many high profile examples at the same time of investors consumed by material
greed.
It is amazing that an article with so many obvious shortcomings and downrightly
challengeable simplifications has continued to wield so much influence; perhaps
this is the ultimate testimony to its ideological function in contemporary capitalism.
But having once exposed its shortcomings here, one important line of attack
against the position that we have taken up in this book regarding the level of critiques
in business ethics is eliminated. The way is open to what we have labelled as a
Level 2 critique, that is, to a consideration of the moral responsibilities of a company
in relation to the wider community or society in which it is located, where this
social responsibility is not seen as being exhausted in the simple maximization of
profits.
A second set of pronouncements, which in a more subtle way ban any real
Level 2 critique of the role that a business ought to play in a capitalist market
economy, are those regarding ‘strategic corporate social responsibility’ (CSR) in
the works of Porter and Kramer. Their thinking on strategic CSR has been outlined
principally in two works written respectively in 2002 and 2006.10 The essence in
particular of their second article (2006) is that there has been a tendency to think
of the pursuit of a socially responsible approach to business, the pursuit of CSR,
as something entirely at variance with and incompatible with the pursuit of profits.
Yet, they argue that especially in a world of increasingly critical and ecologically
conscious consumers the deliberate pursuit of genuinely socially responsible policies
may at the same time be very profitable for the company. They therefore urge
companies to think of CSR not as a cost or drag, or even as cynical PR (as there
has been a tendency), but rather as something that with a little imagination can be
aligned with a firm’s broader strategy for creating competitive advantage. They
therefore urge businesses to think of CSR as something to be integrated into their
overall formation of strategy rather than thinking of it as an annoying afterthought.
Porter and Kramer’s thesis is not without its merits and they certainly point to
a much more fruitful and effective way for businesses to integrate considerations
of CSR into their day-to-day activities. The trouble is that they implicitly seem
to suggest that there can always be a happy convergence of what is profitable and
what is socially responsible to give a ‘win–win’ outcome. This may be the case
more often than has been thought in the past but it is hardly the case all of the
time. One has only to think of such examples as the Seiagustus case outlined in
the first chapter of this work, involving the cynical dumping of waste in less
developed countries with more lax regulations and/or corrupt self-seeking
bureaucrats; or the application of lower safety standards to operations in states where
companies think that they can get away with it. These sorts of activity are clearly
good for profits (by greatly lowering costs) especially if they can be kept quiet,
even if clearly socially irresponsible. Hence Porter and Kramer’s position is based
ultimately on a somewhat naïve faith that profitability and socially responsible
behaviour by a company will always (or nearly always) coincide. Moreover they
urge companies in effect to concentrate exclusively on those areas of CSR that
can simultaneously contribute to the firm’s overall strategy, that is, to the firm’s
profitability.
In the end, therefore, their position, like Friedman’s, adopts an ideological stance
in respect of capitalism. The overriding importance of the pursuit of profit as the
goal of the firm, hence of running the firm in the interests above all of the
shareholders, is reasserted as something that is beyond question.
For Porter and Kramer there can be no in-depth questioning of the role that
a company plays in society; they suggest indeed that the antinomy of company
and society is pointless since companies are an integral part of society and so they
see the idea that companies could act against the society as almost an absurdity.
Such a stance, if taken to its extreme conclusion, would imply that there cannot
ever be dysfunctional ties in societies or communities and so nothing that happens
in a society can ever be criticized. It seems to us that it is this latter position towards
which Porter and Kramer seem to tend that is patently absurd. Hence we reiterate
the importance for business ethics to be prepared to carry out a searching critique
of the role that business plays in relation to the wider community or society in
which it operates; and this we have described as Level 2 of the critical dimensions
of business ethics.
Level 3
There is a third level of critique incumbent on a truly critical business ethics which
is perhaps more abstract than the previously identified levels but which in our view
is inescapable in an international business setting. We have already alluded to this
on p. 23 above when we introduced the concept of a methodologically normative
approach to business ethics but we will now develop this third level in detail. Our
argument will be that this third level of critique is unavoidable in the globalized
context of contemporary business.
Put very simply, a typical multinational business (even a small or medium-sized
enterprise) that seeks to conduct its business in an ethical manner will regularly
find itself in a position where a variety of ethical codes could plausibly be applied,
and therefore where a decision will have to be made either collectively or at an
individual level as to which of the codes to apply (in cases where the codes give
different or conflicting recommendations as to action). Stated abstractly as above,
this might seem a relatively hypothetical type of dilemma about which a real business
will rarely have to trouble itself. Yet in fact contemporary international business
throws up these sorts of problems on a regular basis. Examples would be the ethics
of employing child labour in less developed states, the treatment of and
opportunities for women in the workplace, the moral issues of interest and usury11
and issues about the appropriate ecological stance to take in respect of a whole
range of environmental matters such as disposal of waste. Many commentators have
tended to trivialize this moral choice by adopting glib formulae such as ‘do
whatever is legally acceptable in the country where one is operating’ or ‘when in
Rome do as the Romans do’.12
Taking each of these in turn, the first formula commits the very basic conceptual
error of equating what is legally acceptable with what is morally correct. Laws are
certainly influenced by the prevailing morality of a community but morality
cannot be reduced to or equated with law. Apart from the fact that there are many
laws that are entirely morally neutral (e.g. laws regarding on what side of the road
to drive, etc.), if law and morality are coincident it would be logically impossible
ever to speak of ‘bad’ law. An alternative interpretation of this position would be
to say that it is simply an application of Friedman’s formula whereby a company’s
(or to be precise for Friedman, the manager’s) moral responsibility is solely to
maximize profits within the limits of the law (rules of the game). The same criticism
as just mentioned applies to this but, furthermore, for a Friedmanite in the context
of multinational business there is the question of which country’s law to apply
when there is a conflict of laws. Of course, a Friedmanite would probably at this
point fall back on ‘when in Rome do as the Romans do’, that is, apply local law.
But let us be quite clear: that is itself a moral choice.13
This brings us in fact to a discussion of the second position, ‘When in Rome
do as the Romans do’. At least this does not confuse law with morality and it
makes a clear moral choice: we ought to act in each community exactly as the
local people act (or say they ought to act). While in many cases this formula has
been put forward in a relatively unthinking manner it in effect enunciates the
position known to moral philosophers as moral relativism. We will now consider
this position as a prelude to introducing the idea of metaethics: namely, of a critical
morality of moralities (which in essence is our Level 3 of critique).
Moral relativism has been a popular and much touted position among wide
ranges of contemporary thinkers not only in moral philosophical circles but also
over a whole range of sociological, cross-cultural and even economic studies.
Enunciating as its central principle that ‘there are no absolute or universal moral
values; all moral values are rather culturally relative’, moral relativism finds itself
very much in sympathy with the broader constellation of theories and perspectives
that have come to be known as postmodernism. This latter is in effect an attack
on a whole variety of fronts against the great Enlightenment movements of thought

deriving ultimately from Descartes, Leibniz, Locke, etc. and which are often
labelled as modernism. The hallmark of modernism is its rationalist starting point
(epitomized in Descartes’ Discourse on Method14). All modernists in various ways
shared Descartes view that by the rigorous application of reasoning human beings
could reach an array of absolutely proven indubitable and so universal propositions,
that is, knowledge properly so-called. Such absolutely proven propositions were
epitomized by mathematical theorems that in turn were extensively applied by the
modernists to astronomy, physics, chemistry, etc. But many modernists also held
that universal truths should be sought in such fields as moral and political
philosophy. The moral philosophies of Immanuel Kant or Bentham’s utilitarianism
spring to mind, or the political philosophies of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, etc. The
intellectual edifice constructed by Hegel whereby the whole of human history is
interpreted and explained as the march of Reason in the world is perhaps the
crowning achievement of modernism.
Modernism began to fall from intellectual favour from approximately the 1920s
as a number of initially unconnected attacks were mounted across an array of
different disciplines on rationalist universalist approaches to thinking. Broadly
speaking, the attacks began from the field of literary criticism and hermeneutics,
spread out into anthropology, cross-cultural studies (where of course the diversity
in what different people take to be absolute became painfully apparent) and
eventually crystallized around Bertrand Russell’s failed attempt to construct a logically
perfect language15 and Ludwig Wittgenstein’s effective response to this: the
philosophy of ‘language games’. This latter philosophy proclaims in effect a
universal epistemological relativism: every human cognition is relative in the sense
that it forms part of a particular language game with its own specific rules. People
can readily understand each other and there can be a rational exchange of views
among people who play the same language game (share the same basic pre-
sumptions/world view); but, among people who are playing in different language
games, rational discussion becomes difficult if not in the end impossible. This
relativist philosophy was applied particularly to the fields of moral philosophy and
cultural studies where it came to be seen as a badge of tolerance and respect: in
different cultural settings there are different moral value systems (often deriving
from different religions) and they are all worthy of equal respect, etc. There are
no moral absolutes.
Yet, upon closer examination, this moral relativism can become extremely
dangerous and a licence for the total abandonment of all moral values. In an
increasingly interdependent world, where ease of travel and communication have
led to huge increases in the degree of interaction between people of different cultures
and moral values, there can arise a whole array of practical cases where the
different cultures/moral systems yield up different and often directly conflicting
moral advice; and then what are we to do? Which system are we to follow? For
a strict postmodernist relativist there can be no absolute or universal set of values
to which appeal can be made in such cases; and so there can be no clear moral
Other documents randomly have
different content
“Let me go wid you darlint” ses I.
“But—the letter?” ses she, “somewan must give it to Mr. Dudley.”
“I’ll be plazed to do it” spoke up Minnie at wanse.
She looked at Minnie misdoutfully. Thin she wint up to her and
quitely guv her the note.
“I’ll trust you then!” ses she to the crachure.
About sivin in the avening the hole family, including meself set out
from the house for 17 Arch Strate, which is the number on the letter
paper. Mr. John and Mr. James walked on eyther side there puir
mother, haulding her up by the arms, while Miss Claire and I carried
hankychiffs and smilling salts. By and by we cam to the place, a little
auld barn setting up aginst the side walk. The family guv a look at
the noomber and thin walked boldly in widout nocking. There were a
noysy lot of men inside. A little greesy fellow in overalls cum
sontering up to Mr. John.
“What can I do for you?” ses he.
Mr. James ansers befure his brother can spake.
“Is Mr. Wolley here?” ses he bloontly.
“Shure” ses the man “he’s over there wid Miss Flyte” ses he.
Mrs. Wolley stepped forward, her eyes popping out wid anger.
“Where?” ses she in such a horty tone the man stared at her wid
surprise.
“There!” ses he, and poynts across the barn. “Hes having a bit of
trubble wid the auld lady” ses he.
“Mr. Wolley cum crorling frum underneath the ortermobile.”
We wint across the barn, but see nothing but wan of thim red
tooring cars. We’ve cum close to the ortermobile whin Mr. James
makes a discuvery. Theres sumwan lying undernathe the masheen.
He’s hammering on sumthing, and theres a lited lantern on the flure
beside him. Just as the discuvery was made, Mr. John likewise seen
the feet; then Miss Claire reckynised her papa’s boots and me his
hat. Mrs. Wolley nelt down and looked under the masheen. Then she
guv a scrame.
“Charles!” ses she and almost faints. Mr. Wolley cum crorling frum
undernathe the ortermobile. He looks a site, wid his face cuvvered
clane wid dirt and his hands dripping down wid greese.
He guv a look about him, seen us all, and drapped his mouth open
wid astonishment. Joost then Mr. James burst out larfing, and the
hole blessed family joyned in.
“You dummed old frord” ses Mr. James.
“What do you meen sor?” ses Mr. Wolley.
“Whares Miss Flyte?” asks Mr. John.
The auld fellow looked sheepish, and he guv a look back at the
ortermobile.
“Well, ye may as well no the thruth” ses he, “Ive made a good
invistmint. I’ve bort Miss Flyte. She’s a ginooine bargin, better than
anny Frinch imported car, and at quarter the price. I’ve been coming
avenings to lern how to run and understand her. Isn’t she a booty?”
ses he, turning to his new infachuation.
Mrs. Wolley guv a little sob, then she run tord him jest like a child,
and he guv her a kiss, and then helped her clime into the masheen.
“There’s room for six” ses he. “All aboord. We’ll tak Miss Flyte
home.”
CHAPTER XIX
NEXT DAY
“An ortermobile” ses Mr. Wolley at the brikfust table “is the veehicle
of the moduns. Its a boom to soofering yumanity in this yumid and
turribly trying and hot summers of this climut. In my opinyon” ses
he, “its the greatest of modun invinshuns. Don’t interrupt James” ses
he, turning upon Mr. James, who was snickering noysily, “I confess”
ses Mr. Wolley “that I was want sometime ago to curse the horseliss
vehicle, but times are changed” ses he, “and we who wish to kape
step wid the times must grow wid it. An ortermobile is a cooltivated
taste its like olives. Whin first tasted we detist its flavour, but having
thryed it wanse or twice we becum its ardint slaves. Jimmy” ses he
“pass me anuther musk melon. John er—whats the news this
marning?”
“O nothing par” ses Mr. John grinning behind his paper. “Our
rickliss pressydint is waring pink pyjamas and Roosel Sage is ded.”
As I was coming down the steps leading from the oopstares to the
bastemint, who should I see, standing outside me kitchen door, but
Mr. Moolvaney. The gintleman has his face aginst the closed dure,
and hes after serrynading the lady inside—namely, me warm frind
Minnie Carnavan, wid the folling sinseliss milody. I shstood still on
the stares to lissen:
“In Dublin’s fair city
The girls are so pretty
I wanse laid me eyes
On Miss Molly Malone,
Who wheeled a wheel barrow
The streets broad and narrow
Of cockles and mussels alive, alive, Ho!
Alive, alive, Ho, ho!
Alive, alive, Ho, ho!
Of cockles and mussels
Alive, alive, Ho!
She was a fish monger

But shure twas no wonder
For so was her father and mother before
And they both wheeled a barrow
Of cockles and mussels alive, alive, Ho!
She died of the fever,

Whin no wan cud save her
And that was the ind of Miss Molly Malone
But her gost wheels her barrow
Of cockles and mussel alive, alive, Ho!”
As the gintleman finished I shtepped down the stares, and joost

thin he toorned about and seen me caming tord him. He guv a
shstart, and ses he:
“Why Delia, is it yersilf, indade? Well, well” ses he, “and shure I
was after thinking it was yersilf was inside the kitchin.”
I condisinded not wan ward, but I walked into me kitchin, past the
false craychure, and I shoot the dure bang in his face. Minnie’s
seeted on a chare, shsmiling from eer to eer.
“Its a grand voyse” ses she, “I’m after lissening to. Who is the
handsum gintleman Delia deer” ses she.
Joost thin the spaking chube rung out and I wint to it at wanse,
and shouted oop at the tap of me voyse:
“I refoose to ansswer!” and wid that I shstopped up the doomed
thing wid me dish towel.
CHAPTER XX
A WEEK LATER
Its been a week of sorrer and disthress since Minnie Carnavan cam
to visit me. Shure theres been no more peace or cumfort in me
brest. She do be the most obstreprus crachure in the warld,
shsticking her auld nose into ivvrywan’s thrubbles and ristliss and
onhappy widout shes making mischiff. Ivery nite since Minnie cum
there do be thrubble of sum sort.
Shes after making the lives of the poor yung crachures
disthressful, by interfeering in their innersint convysashun. Ivery nite
whin I streches out me weery tired body upon me bed I lissen to the
words of Minnie.
Mr. Doodley do be a rascal and a scallywag. He do be desining to
rooin the life of Miss Claire. Its me thats a sinful crachure for not
exposing thim to her parents and brothers, and its she Minnie
Carnavan, who will seek counsil of her holy father confisser, whos no
wan but hersilf. Its ny to busting she is wid keeping the sacred of
the puir yung crachures love affare, and its tired I am wid me indliss
attimpts to conthrol her. And now its in dred and feer I am that
something dredful is about to happen.
To-nite whin Minnie was lissening at the dure, wid her eer pricked
up aginst the keyhole of me private dyning-room, Mr. Dudley
suddenly opens the dure. He has a bottle in his hand, and as he
opens it Minnie falls at his feet.
“Is there a cat here?” ses he, and shqirts the silzer wather in her
face.
CHAPTER XXI
FOLLOWING DAY
This marning whin I waked I missed Minnie Carnavan at me side.

Sitting up and looking about me, I seen Minnie seeted at me table,
riting a litter. She seen me whin I set up, and she faulded oop her
litter and licked the invilip.
“Well Minnie Carnavan” ses I “and what are you up to at this
unarthly our?”
“Hoosh, darlint!” ses she, caming to me bed, and setting down
beside me. “Delia” ses she “I’ve dun it.”
“Dun what?” ses I and I begin to have misgivings.
“I’ve rote” ses Minnie “to the auld gintleman.”
“To Mr. Wolley” ses I a bit daft.
“No” ses she shaking her hed. “To the lad’s father.”
For a minit me tung faled me. I stared at the crachure in silinse.
She got ap from me bed and sarched about for her hat, found it and
put it on.
“Delia O’Malley” ses she “That yung Dudley fellow do be fresh as
sour milk” ses she. “Its been on me conshunse iver sinse I came,
mavourneen, to poonish him for his thricks. Its desaving the pretty
Miss Claire hes after oop to. Trust an auld girl like Minnie Carnavan
to see throo the thricks of a yung spalpeen like that.”
“Minnie” ses I meekly, for theres a feer in me hart that maks me
week as a kitten, “Tell me the truth darlint. Be you going to male a
litter to the lad’s father?”
“Indade and I am” ses Minnie bauldly, “and to mak shure” ses she
“that the old dude gets it safely, I’ll be me own postman and deliver
it in person. Goodbye Delia mavoarneen, I’ll not be coming back.
Give me luv to Mr. Mulvaney.”
Befure I cud git me wits thegither again, Minnie, the ritched, false
crachure was gone. I herd the frunt dure close behind her.
CHAPTER XXII
NEXT DAY
Oh wirrah! wirrah! wirrah! Its a sad and loansome warld and its a
trecherus snake is Minnie.
Yesterday me hart was full of feers. Its menny an effort I made to
relave mesilf to Miss Claire, but for pity for the puir yung creachure
me tung refused to spake.
Last nite was a nite of shocks. Mr. John cum down to the
bastemint and taks possisshun after dinner of me privat dining-
rume. The widder do be giving him a barskit full of seeds, frish
picked from her gardin, and he’s after wanting he ses to sort thim
out and mark the reyspictiv packages so he may know them nixt
Spring whin hes going to have a fine gardin.
Miss Claire cum into me kitchin, wid her bloo eyes swimming wid
teers.
“What will we do, Delia?” ses she, “John is in the dining-room to-
nite, and I cant get him out.”
“Now don’t you be after wurriting darlint” ses I, “Shure Mr. Harry
is wilcam to me kitchin.”
“But John may walk in upon us” ses she despritly.
“He’d better not” ses I, and wid that I wint to the dure and called
out to Mr. John:
“Will ye be good enuff to kape your disthance from me kitchin to-
nite, as its private company I’m expicting.”
“Very well Delia” ses he perlitely.
I wint outside to the bastemint dure, and wated in person for Mr.
Harry. When he arrived, I tauld him the state of things, and he
slipped into me kitchen. Miss Claire were sitting on me table, her
little feet swinging in the air.
“Good avening” ses she, trying to smile and look chareful “Ye’ll
obsarve” ses she “the extrames to which we are driven. John holds
the fort to-nite.”
Mr. Harry is haulding her hands as she spakes, and watching her
face like he wad ate her up.
“Had I better go thin?” ses he.
“O, if you want to” ses she, slipping down from the table, and
turning away from him a bit.
“Want to!” ses he, “You don’t meen that!”
“No” ses she, saftly, “I—I don’t.”
I thot the yung lad wud grab her, but joost thin he seen me and
kept still.
Miss Claire sayses hauld of a frying pan.
“Never mind” ses she “We’ll enjoy oursilves aven in the kitchen?
You’ve never tasted me famiss fudge, have you Mr. Dudley?”
“No” ses he, looking at her pretty arms, as she rolled back the
sleeves from thim.
“Well” ses she “I larned to make it in me Vassa days. Get me an
aprun, Delia” ses she.
I brot her wan of her own—a little red gingum thin wid frills and
pockits. She let him button it behind her, and he tuk so long she
broke away larfing and blooshing.
“Now” ses she “You may help me. I want cream, sugar, butter and
chocklett. A bit of vernilla too” ses she.
They set to work, busy and happy as childrun making mud pies.
By and by the stuff was cooked, and she set him to mixing it, “and
mix it stiff” ses she, “while I greese the pans.”
This dun, she took a spoon and scooping out a bit she hild it to his
lips. He, not looking at the fudge, but wid his eyes fixed on her,
opened his mouth and took in the spoon. Then he guv a yell and
down drapped the spoon.
“Oh!” ses she, turning pail, “wuz it hot? Harry!” ses she, “I burned
you!”
“You call me Harry!” ses he, and saysed hauld of her by the arms.
I was watching wid all me eyes, whin I herd the dure squake a bit.
Befure I cud move tords it Miss Claire roon oop aginst it and hild it
closed wid her little hands.
“The china closet, Delia!” she wispered, and I shuvved Mr. Harry
into the closet and banged the dure tite. Whin we let in Mr. John he
looked about him.
“Whats the matter?” ses he, “Why did you hauld me out?”
“O” ses Miss Claire, gayly, “Its a game Delia and I are playing.”
He frowned and ses cauldly.
“Ye cud find bitter implyment I fancy than playing in the kitchen
wid Delia. Your not a child Claire” ses he.
Shes about to spake in ansser whin the frunt dure bell run, and I
saized me aprun and wint to ansser it, laving the yung peeple alone.
As I reeched the upper flure, I seen Mr. Wolley turning on the lites in
the hall. Then he opened the dure. A little auld gintleman wid
wiskers on his cheeks and spats on his feet stud there.
“Good avening” ses he, “Mr. Wolley, I belave?”
I cud tell by Mr. Wolley’s back that his face was purple. He harf
closed the dure, and thin agin opened it.
“What is it you want?” ses he roodely.
“Who is it father?” ses Mr. James, comeing into the hall, then he
too seen the little gintleman. The latter is spaking wid horchure and
dignity.
“I cum, sor” ses he, “to—er—ask—you sir, to requist me sun to
lave your house.”
“I don’t oonderstand you” ses Mr. Wolley cauldly.
“I resaved” ses the auld gintleman, stepping into the hall, “a
nonnymuss epissle this marning. Ordinary I ignoar sich things, but
me suspishuns had alreddy been aroused. I tuk it upon mesilf to
play the detictive to-nite. When me sun left the house I followed him
here. I saw him inter ye’re place be way of the—er—bastemint” ses
he hortily. “I wayted around a bit and thin desided to spake to you
personally. You—er—probably appreeshiate me position” ses he. “I
of coorse, shall absolutely refuse to reckynise anny foolish shcrape
of the yungster—he’s a mere boy” he adds loftily.
“Sir” ses Mr. Wolley, “if yure yung ass of a sun—I yuse the word
advisedly” ses he “has been making a fool of himsilf over a girl in me
imploy, I am not intrusted in the affare. Will you be good enuff to go
to the back dure.”
Wid that he’s about to open the dure, when he seen me standing
there.
“Delia!” ses he, “Heres your yung man’s father. Just tak him into
the kitchen.”
Old Mr. Dudley seemed aboot to boorst, but befure he cud spake,
Mr. James tuk him by the arm and lid him gintly but firmly to the
kitchen dure. As I was about to follow Mr. Wolley saised hauld of me
slave.
“Delia!” ses he, wispering excitedly, “is Claire doon stares?”
“‘Go away John! Go away!’ ses she, ‘you shan’t open the dure.’”
“N-no—yes—indade I don’t know sir” ses I and I picked up me

aprun and begun to cry into it.
We disinded to me kitchin—Mr. Wolley, Mr. James and auld Mr.
Dudley, who shtumbled on the dark steps and sneezed whin he got
to the bottom. In the kitchin we cum upon a straynge site. Miss
Claire was standing wid her back aginst me china closet; her eyes
were big and wild looking, and she kept talking to Mr. John who stud
befure her.
“Go away, John! Go away!” ses she. “You shan’t open the dure!
You shan’t! You shan’t!” ses she. Then she seen us all and she guv a
little cry.
“Delia! O Delia!” ses she, “don’t let him. He—he soospicts
sumthing,” ses she, and then she poot her hed down on me shoulder
and burst into teers.
I herd Mr. Harry moving in the closet, and I belave the yung chap
must have herd Miss Claire weeping, for joost as she boorst into
teers, he forced open the dure. For a moment he stud blinking, and
thin he seen us all. He guv a look first at his father and as the auld
gintleman wint tord him he drew himsilf up stiff and faced him.
“Well sir!” ses the auld fellow, choking wid rage, “so this is whare
ye’ve been spinding your avenings—in the kitchen of these
contemtyble pinny-a-liners.”
“One moment” ses the lad, and suddintly he turned to Miss Claire,
and poot an arm about her, but befure he cud draw her to him, Mr.
James had dashed forward.
“Dam you!” ses he, “tak your hands aff me sister!” Wid that he
rinched thim apart.
Yung Dudley toorned very pail, but he smiled quarely, as he
moved tord the dure.
“Claire!” ses he, spaking clear over the heds of ivery wan,
“raymimber darlint that we love aich other. All will cum rite yet
deerest” ses he.
Thin ignoaring and pooshing past his little angry father he made
his way to the bastemint dure and out.
Mr. Dudley stud a minit looking aboot him his thin lips poorsed ap
in a snarling shmile. He adrissed himself to Mr. Wolley, but his eyes
was on Miss Claire.
“Me sun” ses he “is yung and rash. This is not the first time I have
been obleeged to cum in person to extrycate him from sich a scrape.
Forchunatly” ses he “we expict him to make an airly marruge. I was
talking to his finansay’s father to-day and its aboot desided that the
yung fokes will both be sint abrord nixt week. Good avening sir” ses
he “You will not be thrubbled again” ses he. Thin, still smiling in that
nasty insoolting way of his, he bowed and wint.
CHAPTER XXIII
NEXT DAY
After the sad ivints of the disthressful day I wint to sleep wid a
hevvy hart, but sorrer a bit of paceful sleep did I get. I drimt that
Minnie do be cuming to tak my place wid the Wolley family. By
desateful words and ackshons she have worked upon the feelings of
Miss Claire and now its me the family do be blaming for the
thrubbles. I do be weeping fit to make a hart of stone ake and
telling Miss Claire its me thats been a true and loving girl, a foolish
victim of the sinful Minnie. But in me dream Miss Claire refoosed to
look at me at all at all, and its wirrah, wirrah, I be crying in me
sleep. Thin I herd somewan whispering at me eer.
“Delia! Delia!”
I set up wildly in me bed, and there I seen Miss Claire in the
moonlite.
“Its I, Claire—don’t be fritened, Delia” ses she.
“My God! Miss” ses I “ye do be after scaring a body. Whats the
thrubble darlint” for shes neeling by me bed crying fit to brake her
hart.
After a bit she looked up and ses:
“Theyve been watching me all avening. They’ll niver let me be
alone wid you agin. You see papa ses your to blame, and James ses
that if you hadn’t incoraged us to yuse your kitchen and——”
I set up and shuk me fist.
“Ef Mr. James” ses I “has anny crittersickem to be after making on
a poor loan hardworking girl he’d better spake to me.”
“Oh Delia” ses she “plase don’t get excited. Lissen. I’m not to be
house-kaper anny longer. I don’t know how Harry and I will see aich
other, and Oh Delia,” ses she, saizing me by the shouwlder, “Did you
heer him say that he—he loved me?”
“That I did darlint” ses I, “so don’t you be after wurrying, for all
the avil minded brothers in the warld, all the cross eyed, hard
harted, black sowled, crool fathers and mothers cant coom betune a
pare of swateharts whin troo love is after stipping in.”
“Yes” ses she airnestly “but do you relly think he ment it?”
“Ment it! Its ashamed I am of you Miss Claire. Is it misdouting the
woord of Mr. Dudley, you be, and he as foine a yung chap as iver
stepped alive?”
The teers dryed up like magick, and she smiled as swately as a
aingel. “Yes” ses she “he did mean it, and all will cum rite, for love”
ses she “will shurely foind a way.”
“That it will” ses I.
Well, thin she wint to bed, and I belave slipt sowndly, for her
cheeks were pink as roses in the marning, and her eyes brite and
luvly.
She ses “Good marning everybody” in a brave gay toan whin she
cam to the brikfust table, wid the intyre family setting there and
waiting in agunny for her to apeer, all suffering wid the thort of her
broken hart.
Mr. John lifts oop his paper, and I seen him frowning like to brake
his face behind it—hes that ankshiss to keep back a teer. Auld Mr.
Wolley blew his nose like it was a throompet. Mr. James swollers his
coffee red hot, and Mrs. Wolley tuk to crying to hersilf. Miss Claire
guv a kiss to little Willy and wan to her father. Then she et her
brikfust, beeming on everybody.
After brikfust Mrs. Wolley cam into the kitchen and guv me the
orders for the day. I herd Mr. Wolley’s ortermobile and looking from
me winder seen him go by wid Miss Claire setting by his side, and
Mr. John and James in the tonno. Mr. Billy wint out to his sand pile
and Mrs. Wolley left me in peese.
It was baking day and I had jest set me bred into the pans for the
fynal raysing and had opened the oven dure to see how me spunge
cake was doing, whin I herd a bit of muvement at me back. I turned
aboot, and let out a turrible yell, for there was me frind from the
Dudley’s. He do be standing in me kitchin bauld and brazen as if he
belonged there, and theres a larf in his eye and on his bauld mouth
too.
Now if theres wan thing bad for spoonge cake it do be a sudden
bang or noyse. Its bownd to mak the finest cake fall down. Silinse is
the rool wid all good cooks whin the cakes in the ooven. I throo wan
look at me sponge cake and shure enuff the preshus stuff had fallen
flat. Thin I rose and faced aboot on the impident yung spalpeen
standing there.
“Its plane to see” ses I me hands on me hips “whare you hale
frum. Its ashamed I am to acnolege you a coontryman of me own,
and its lissons in foine manners ye mite be after taking” ses I “from
the foine cortsheeis yung gintleman wid hoom ye have the dayly
honour of assoshyating.”
“Is it the frog ater ye’re maning, Delia deer?” ses he.
“Me name” ses I “Is Miss O’malley, and its no time I’m after
having for the loike of you.” Wid that I picked up me chopping bowl
and wint to wark upon the hash, a sartin loonch dispised by Mr.
James whos after wanting stake wid every meel.
Mr. Mulvaney guv a larfing look at the dure lately intercated by
me, then he walked over to it carelessly and shut it closed. Wid that
I almost chopped me thoomb off in me rage. He cum over to the
table and set upon it wid his foot a swinging. Then he leaned tord
me and wispered.
“Delia darlint” ses he “what wud ye be after giving me for a love
letter.”
I sthopped me chopping, and guv him wan look of contimpt and
scorn.
“Larry Mulvaney” ses I “if ye’re wanting to no the throo value of
the artucle you minshun I’ll tell you. Its a clout over the eer I’d be
giving you for reword” ses I and I chopped feercely.
“But suppose” ses he, leening a bit neerer “that the litter was not
for you.”
At that I stopped me chopping.
“If its Minnie ye’re swate on——” but here he interrupted and took
the paper from his coat and tossed it up in the air.
“Its for Miss Wolley” ses he, “and its from Mr. Harry himself.”
I guv such a joomp me chopping boal wint over, wid all me
prishus hash on the flure, and that the last morsil of meet in the
house for loonch.
“My God, Mr. Mulvaney!” ses I, “do you mean it?”
He’s very lofty now, and rising oop ses hortily:
“I’d like to see Miss Wolley if you plaze, Miss O’Malley” ses he wid
emfasis.
“Shes out” ses I. He moved tord the dure, me aafter him, and I
cort him by his slave.
“‘But suppose,’ ses he, leening a bit nearer, ‘that the litter was not for you?’”
“Guv it to me Larry!” I begged, “Its niver a chance the family will

guv you to hand it to the puir child and shure if ye’ll jest hand it to
me I’ll slip it into her hand widout a sole in the house gessing the
trooth.”
But Mr. Mulvaney put the letter into his brist pocket. Then he
crossed his arms, and stares at me.
“Delia” ses he, “tell me the thruth. Are you sweet on the
Frinchman?”
“Thats me personal affare, Mr. Moolvaney” ses I.
“Becorse if ye are” ses he “its only fare to let ye know hes meerly
after ye-re hard airned savings. The Frinch are slick, but its a true
hart ye’re needing to leen upon.”
“Larry Mulvaney” ses I “will you or will you not be after handing
me the letter for Miss Claire?”
“On wan condition” ses he.
“Spake it” ses I.
“Guv me a kiss, darlint” ses he.
“I’ll be dummed first” ses I wid indigation.
“Be dummed then” ses he, “but lissen swatehart. Mr. Dudley do be
sinding Mr. Harry aff to Yurope to-morrow marning airly. Its the long
distunse cure the auld gintleman do be after expicting for the lad.
Now Mr. Harry has rote a litter of ixplanashuns to Miss Claire
appoynting an intervew. So Delia darlint its oop to you. Shall Miss
Claire have the litter or shall she not?”
“My God Mr. Mulvaney” ses I “do you mean to say ye’d be holding
back the litter from the puir yung thing?”
“Oonless” ses he, “you guv me a kiss.”
“Tak it then” ses I “and be dummed to you.”
Wid that he guv a joomp, saysed me about the waste and kissed
me smack on the lips, and me riddy to sink into the airth for shame,
for shure its the first time a lad do be giving me a kiss. He slipped
the letter into me hand. Wid that I cam to me sinses and struck out
wid me free hand. But Larry guv a larf at the smack I’m giving him
and ses he:
“Delia darlint thats nothing but a love smack. Goodbye
mavourneen, it’ll be manny a day befure ye’ll forgit the kissing I’ve
given you.”
Whin he was gone I looked about me kitchin, hardly knowing what
I was seeing, wid the ixcipshun of the hash on the flure. Prisintly I
herd the family coming home and I sneeked upstares hoping to get
the chance of seeing Miss Claire alone. The family was on the porch,
and I herd Mr. James reeding aloud from a litter in his hand:
“Deer Miss Wolley” he red, “me sun sales for Yurope per S. S.
Germanya to-morrow morning at 7, and is accumpanied by Miss Una
Robbins and her father.”
Thin followed a few more wards in which the auld scallywag
congrachulated the puir yung crachure upon her iscape from a
young fellow whos intinshuns were not seerius since he was all the
time ingaged to another girl and he begged to remane hers
fathefully S. Judd Dudley.
I left the family looking at aich other in silince and wint oop thray
stips at a time to the child’s room. I nocked saftly.
“Miss Claire!” I called.
I herd her sobbing inside and I called agin, “Miss Claire darlint!”
At that she called:
“Go away Delia! Go away!”
“Miss Claire!” I called wid me mouth to the keyhole “for the love of
God open the dure.” After a moment I herd the key turn and thin
she opened it joost a crack or two. I throost in me hand and
shuvved the letter in at the dure. I herd her guv a little moofled
scrame and thin she was sylint. I stole away down stares and cryed
in peece in me dish towel. Shure I’d be giving the bauld lad a
hoondred kisses more, ef he were to ask me again for thim joost
now.
CHAPTER XXIV
NEXT DAY
At 4 A.M. Miss Claire cum into me room. She’s all dressed and she
shuk me a bit and brung me me clothes. “Dress quickly Delia” ses
she, “I’m going to meet him.”
“Mr. Harry?” ses I. She nods, her eyes shining both wid teers and
smiles.
“Hurry!” ses she, “Its still dark and I’m afrade to go doon stares
alone.”
I was into me clothes in a minit and thegither we wint down the
back stares. We cum to the bastemint and Miss Claire opened the
back dure, and stud there waiting. There was not a bit of sun at the
our, and it getting tord the fall the air do be chilly. Ivery whare we
looked there seemed to be oogly gray clouds in the sky and the
grass do be thick wid hevvy jew. But Miss Claire waited on at the
dure, and wotched the sky, “For” ses she, “he sed at sunrise.”
After a bit I seen a speck of gold cum crapping into the gray of
the sky and it grew a wee bit liter. Then I seen Mr. Harry cum acrost
the lon. Miss Claire seen him too and she wint out a step or two to
meet him. Then he seen her and he cum running tord her, wid his
arms hild wide out, and she started running tord him likewise, till
they cum to aich other, and then wid never a word they were in aich
other’s arms, he toorning oop her face and looking at it. Thin
soodently she put it doon aginst his coat (jest as I had dun wid that
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade
Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.
Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!
ebookultra.com

Business Ethics A Critical Approach Integrating Ethics Across the Business World 1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business Ethics A Critical Approach Integrating Ethics Across the Business World 1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Business Ethics A Critical Approach Integrating Ethics Across the Business World 1st Edition Patrick O'Sullivan 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download the full version of the ebook now at ebookultra.

Business Ethics A Critical Approach

Explore and download more ebook at https://ebookultra.com

Business Ethics A Stakeholder and Issues Management

Business Ethics 8th Edition William Shaw

Case Histories in Business Ethics 1st Edition Chris Megone

The Economics of Business Valuation Towards a Value

Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society 1st Edition

Business Ethics Policies and Persons 4 ed. Edition Kenneth

The Blackwell Guide to Business Ethics Blackwell

Business Ethics Case Studies and Selected Readings Sixth

Patrick O’Sullivan is Professor and Head of Department of People, Organizations

Mark Smith is Associate Professor of Human Resource Management at Grenoble

Mark Esposito is Associate Professor of Organizational Behaviour and Leadership

‘The authors provide a lively reflection on contemporary business ethics

‘The gist of this book is a challenge – a challenge to reflect on and to rethink

Edited by Patrick O’Sullivan,

ISBN: 978-0-415-66356-4 (hbk)

Typeset in Bembo and Stone Sans by

1 Ethics as social critique 3

2 Levels of critique: a methodological framework

3 The ethical management of ethics: fostering ethical

4 Corporate Social Responsibility, definitional

5 The impact of ethics on the issues of organizational

6 Ethical issues of reification and recognition in HRM:

7 Private vices, business virtues? The institutional strategy

8 The ethical and social dimensions of executive

9 The ethics of the banker: reflections on the banker’s

10 Islamic finance revisited: a brief review with the

11 Ethical issues in the policy response to the 2008

12 Ethics and management: the essential philosophical

13 Mindfulness as a mediator between the effective

14 A cultural appreciation of diversity of ethical

15 Employee surveillance and the modern workplace 206

16 Ethics and marketing 223

18 Social and societal marketing: applications for

19 Designing for a better world 267

20 ‘You take the high road . . .’: analysing the ethical

21 Ethical challenges in business coaching 302

22 Ethical issues for international human resource

23 Competency management: between managerial

24 Epilogue: towards an ethical future for business? 349

7.1 Gross gambling turnover trend 2003–2010 90

Sandrine Ansart, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Omar K. M. R. Bashar, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia

Ion Copoeru, Babeş-Bolyai University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Caroline Cuny, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Raffi Duymedjian, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Mark Esposito, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France, and Harvard University,

Gazi Islam, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Josiena Gotzsch, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Habibullah Khan, U21 Global, Singapore

Carmelo Mazza, IE Business School, Madrid, Spain

Virginie Monvoisin, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Alojzy Z. Nowak, Warsaw University, Poland

Patrick O’Sullivan, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Taran Patel, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Loïck Roche, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France

Lucie Roux, ESCP Europe, London, UK

Pierre-Yves Sanséau, Grenoble Ecole de Management, France