Data Entry: Please note that the research database will be replaced by UNIverse by the end of October 2023. Please enter your data into the system Thanks

Login for users with Unibas email account...

Login for registered users without Unibas email account...

An Analysis of the Conceptual Landscape of Corporate Responsibility in Academia
JournalArticle (Originalarbeit in einer wissenschaftlichen Zeitschrift)
ID 3173171
Author(s) Bergman, Max Manfred; Leisinger, Klaus M.; Bergman, Zinette; Berger, Lena
Author(s) at UniBasel Bergman, Zinette
Berger, Lena
Bergman, Manfred Max
Leisinger, Klaus M.
Year 2015
Title An Analysis of the Conceptual Landscape of Corporate Responsibility in Academia
Journal Business and Professional Ethics Journal
Volume 34
Number 2
Pages / Article-Number 165-193
Keywords responsibility, academia
Mesh terms Social SciencesEthicsSocial Sciences - Other Topics
Abstract Most corporate stakeholders agree that Corporate Responsibility (CR) ought to be part of modern business management and practice. Academic work has been seminal to a fruitful and collaborative relationship between business and society. A closer examination of the contemporary academic narratives on CR, however, reveals a plethora of positions orbiting this complex construct, rendering it and its applications opaque, amorphous, and contested. The bewildering array of conceptualizations and applications leads not only to unintended consequences but also to concrete negative outcomes for most stakeholders. In this study, we map the conceptual landscape of CR in academia by systematically analyzing 120 audio and video recordings of university sponsored or endorsed CR-focused workshops, business meetings, interviews, lectures, conference presentations, roundtable events, and debates held between 2010 and 2014 and deposited at the media repository iTunesU. The recordings were analyzed using Content Configuration Analysis, a qualitative analysis method related to content and thematic analyses. Our results show how business ethics in academia are often debated in opposition to or independent from business and economic concerns. We highlight seven shortcomings within this conceptual space, relating to conceptual disunion, Eurocentrism, lack of specificity with regard to domains, stakeholder bias, areas of application, and normativity. Recommendations to overcome some of these shortcomings are presented to develop policy-relevant and change-oriented approaches to CR, which would make academic work on business ethics more applicable to globalized business and business practices, as well as to further develop collaborative partnerships between academia, business, and society.
Publisher Philosophy Documentation Center
ISSN/ISBN 0277-2027 ; 2153-7828
Full Text on edoc No
Digital Object Identifier DOI 10.5840/bpej20157728
ISI-Number 000448603700002
Document type (ISI) Article

MCSS v5.8 PRO. 0.319 sec, queries - 0.000 sec ©Universität Basel  |  Impressum   |