Explore BrainMass

Explore BrainMass

    Business Ethics Awards: variables to consider, facts and sources, best alternative

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    1.) What are some of the variables considered by Business Ethics in coming up with its list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens?

    2.) Do you agree with these variables? What, if anything, should be added or deleted and why?

    Justify your answers by answering the following in your response:

    A.) "How" you arrived at your answer(s)
    B.) "What" facts and sources you reviewed and considered
    C.) "Why" your response is the best one from all the alternatives

    Information on the above can be found on The Business Ethics Awards at www.business-ethics.com/100best.htm

    Article title is "100 Best Corporate Citizens" and "The Methodology" used to select the winners

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com June 2, 2020, 8:42 pm ad1c9bdddf
    https://brainmass.com/business/corporate-culture-and-human-resource-alignment/business-ethics-awards-variables-to-consider-facts-and-sources-best-alternative-47651

    Solution Preview

    1.) What are some of the variables considered by Business Ethics in coming up with its list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens?

    The variables considered by Business Ethics in coming up with its list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens are the groups of stakeholders, that is shareholders, community, minorities and women, employees, environment, non-US Stakeholders and customers in each category.

    In each category there are concerns and strengths. These include strengths like profit sharing, retirement benefits, and employee involvement. The concerns include variables like union relations and workforce reductions.

    Other variables include: Environmental strengths, for example, might include beneficial products, pollution prevention, and recycling, while concerns would include emissions, climate change, and regulatory problems.

    In addition to this the issues considered are social scandals, or other issues possibly missed, and firms to be pulled. Firms were removed for accounting fraud, for example, or if they lost money two or more years in a row.

    The initial screening of the companies is done on the basis of serving a variety of stakeholders. In addition social data for the companies is considered. Further industry balance and social performance is assessed.

    I arrived at my answer based on the methodology behind the corporate citizenship rankings
    By Samuel P. Graves, Sandra Waddock, and Marjorie Kelly. The facts considered are the Data analysis done by Sandra Waddock and Samuel Graves with the Carroll School of Management, Boston College. My response is best because it is based on the details given by the persons who have done the ranking.

    2.) Do you agree with these variables? What, if anything, should be added or deleted and why?

    I DO NOT AGREE WITH THESE VARIABLES AS THESE ARE TOO BROAD AND ALL ENCOMPASSING
    The current ethical decision making model in negotiation by Lewicki, Saunders,
    & Minton (1999) identifies numerous individual differences and contextual factors that
    affect the intention and motive to use ethically marginal tactics in a negotiation (see
    Figure 1). Among the variables identified by the model are 'cultural norms' - referring
    to the national culture.

    While a number of researchers have investigated the effect of culture on ethical
    decision-making in negotiations - notably Allerheiligen, Graham, & Lin (1985), Triandis
    et al (2001), Volkema, (1998, 1999; 2001) and Zarkada-Fraser & Fraser,(2001) - our
    understanding of how culture effects ethical decision-making in negotiation remains
    incomplete. Typically, researchers have found that there are significant differences in
    views of ethicality across cultures but there is no explanation of how culture affects views
    of ethicality.

    This paper seeks to extend our understanding of how culture affects ethical
    decision-making in negotiation by first arguing for a 'culture in context' view of culture
    as the most appropriate to investigate ethical decision making. We then investigate
    several situational variables that we believe to be particularly significant in cross-cultural
    negotiations by integrating qualitative data from an exploratory study of Australian and
    Chinese (People's Republic of China) negotiators and findings from the business ethics
    literature. From this we propose a model of exogenous variables that interact with, or are
    part of culture.

    Culture in Context

    A culture in context approach recognises that no human behaviour is determined
    by a single cause and may be understood at many different levels simultaneously
    (Lewicki et al., 1999). In its original form as articulated by Janosik (1987), culture in
    context suggests that the effect of culture is likely to be moderated by structural and
    contextual factors. This contrasts with the 'culture as shared values' view of culture that
    still dominates cross-cultural negotiation research. Whereas culture as shared values
    operationalises culture as one or more value dimensions (for example individualism-
    collectivism and high-low context) that act as independent variables on ethical decision
    making, culture in context sees culture as a sticky entity that has both a direct effect and
    moderating effect on situational variables that impact ethical decision making.

    By adopting a culture in context view to investigate cross-cultural differences in
    the way negotiators decide whether or not a tactic is appropriate addresses two related
    concerns. Firstly, in the business ethics literature there is some evidence that there are
    cross-cultural differences in how situational decision-makers are. For example, one
    cultural difference between Easterners and Westerners is that Westerners tend to be more
    universalistic in the application of their ethics whereas ...

    Solution Summary

    In a 2800 word solution, the response thoroughly discusses the concepts. The solution is well cited.

    $2.19

    ADVERTISEMENT