Masters Degrees (Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/3767

Browse

Browsing Masters Degrees (Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology) by Subject "Business ethics -- South Africa"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Corporate governance? : an ethical evaluation of the Second King report in the light of Peter Ulrich's integrative economic ethics
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2004-04) Höver, K. Hendrik W.; Smit, D. J.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Theology. Dept. of Systematic Theology & Ecclesiology.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This assignment is an ethical evaluation of the Second King Report on Corporate Governance. I focus on the relationships between the shareowners, the management and all stakeholders other than shareowners. The instrument used to assess the report is the concept of Integrative Economic Ethics shaped by Peter Ulrich. The Second King Report argues that a company should meet besides its economic needs as well as social and environmental objectives. Therefore, the company has to take responsibility for creating 'sustainable' value in all these three areas. Stakeholders have to be approached inclusively and pro-actively. These are new primary business imperatives due to the increasing social power of companies. However, the report is based upon a one dimensional approach in which the economic bottom line is decisive, and social and environmental interests are only considered if they serve the sustainability of business success. Likewise the inclusive stakeholder approach is a shortcoming, because stakeholder interests are not regarded as legitimate claims within a moral discourse in which all those citizens partake that are affected or involved by the company's activities. Not legitimacy but the stakeholders' relevance for the 'shareowner value' is the determining argument. Conflicting moral claims are not solved by good reasons, but are decided on a priori in favour of the company's overriding goal, which is to make profit. Profit orientation of a company, however, is not an empirical 'fact' but a normative choice, which is for or against specific interest groups and as such has to be legitimised in a moral discourse. Since the report does not subordinate profit orientation under the primacy of ethics, its whole corporate ethical concept is shaped by 'functionalism' even to the extent, that 'ethics' itself is viewed as an economic 'factor'. Yet, this contradicts the controversial and un-objective nature of ethics. In conclusion the report's entire argument is based upon pure strategic economic grounds and, thus, cannot be considered as ethical at all. Shifting the social and environmental corporate responsibility to the market system is based upon unfounded belief in the 'metaphysics of the market'. This, however, does not lie in the enlightened self-interest of a corporate citizen, as the market is merely ruled by power and counter-power - which is only beneficial for those specific societal groups with the sufficient monetary power to stay competitive. On the contrary, the equality of all citizens in a deliberative democracy must be safeguarded. The liberal idea of a just and well-ordered society implies the understanding of the company as a corporate citizen. As such its corporate ethics has to entail not only securing a company's integrity through business principles, but also a socio-political co-responsibility which obliges the company to shape the framework of market competition to enable life-conducive value creation. The general public of free and mature citizens is the locus where all claims, including corporate ones, have to be morally justified.