The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0969-6474.htm

Corporate and
A conceptual framework of business ethics
corporate and business ethics
across organizations
21
Structures, processes and performance
Göran Svensson
Oslo School of Management, Oslo, Norway, and
Greg Wood
Deakin University, Warrnambool, Australia

Abstract
Purpose – The objective of this paper is to introduce and describe a conceptual framework of
corporate and business ethics across organizations in terms of ethical structures, ethical processes and
ethical performance.
Design/methodology/approach – A framework is outlined and positioned incorporating an ethical
frame of reference in the field of organizational chain management.
Findings – A number of areas and sub-areas of corporate and business ethics are framed in the
context across organizations.
Research limitations/implications – The introduced framework should be seen as a seed for
further development and refinement. It provides opportunities for further research of ethical concerns
across organizations.
Practical implications – Organizations may benefit from the findings and insights presented and
they may be used to enhance their ability to manage, monitor and evaluate ethical business practices
across organizations.
Social implications – Changing societal and market patterns may enforce organizations to address
ethical concerns across organizations. A myopic approach restricted to the judicial system may
become insufficient and unsatisfactory from the perspective of other stakeholders of the organization.
Originality/value – The framework makes a contribution bringing in ethical concerns across
organizations, providing a basis for their ethical values and culture, as well as asymmetric
relationships in terms of power and dependence. The authors believe that a true learning organization
needs to realise the importance of an extended view of its endeavors of corporate and business ethics in
terms of ethical structures, ethical processes and ethical performance across organizations.
Keywords Organizations, Business ethics, Organizational structures, Performance management
Paper type Conceptual paper

Introduction
Ethical concerns are an important area in business practices and research endeavours
in the field of organizational chain management. In particular, ethical concerns become
evident in situations of asymmetric relationships across organizations (e.g. in terms of
power and dependence). There is a need to establish ethical structures, processes and
performance measures in organizations. In previous research restricted parts of this The Learning Organization
Vol. 18 No. 1, 2011
idea across organizations have been addressed from an ethical perspective but not the pp. 21-35
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
whole process (e.g. Moberg, 2003; Geraint, 2003; Kidd, 2003; Carter, 2000; Cooper et al., 0969-6474
1997; Stainer, 1997). nevertheless, there have been a few recent research endeavours DOI 10.1108/09696471111095975
TLO dedicated to the ethical concerns in organizational chain management as a whole. For
18,1 example, Svensson and Bååth (2008) introduce and describe a conceptual framework of
organizational chain management ethics based upon the automotive industry.
Svensson (2009) focuses on the transparency of organizational chain management
ethics based upon case illustrations across organizations in the fashion and telecom
industries. The dilemma is that these ethical frameworks in the field of organizational
22 chain management are still on a general level, where specific details are not provided
on how to manage, monitor and evaluate ethical concerns across organizations.
There are multiple research topics that may be linked implicitly or explicitly to
ethical concerns in across organizations, such as: chain management ethics (Svensson
and Bååth, 2008; Svensson, 2009), corporate social responsibility (e.g. Dyllick and
Hockerts, 2002), sustainable supply network management (e.g. Young and
Kielkiewicz-Young, 2001), supply chain environmental management (e.g. Lippman,
1999), green purchasing strategies (e.g. Min and Galle, 1997), environmental
purchasing (e.g. Zsidisin and Siferd, 2001), green marketing (e.g. Crane, 2000),
environmental marketing (e.g. Sheth and Parvatiyar, 1995), environmental marketing
management (e.g. Peattie, 1995) and environmental product differentiation (e.g.
Reinhardt, 1999), reverse logistics (Zikmund and Stanton, 1971), sustainability labeling
schemes (e.g. De Boer, 2003), environmental management (Hoffman, 2000), life-cycle
assessment (Welford, 1999), sustainable supply chain management (Svensson, 2007),
and ISO-14000-certifications (ISO, 2007).
This paper addresses explicitly different areas of how to manage, monitor and
evaluate ethical concerns across organizations. An organization’s ethical values and
culture are fundamental to its persona. The bottom line is that there is a need for a
conceptual framework in the field of organizational chain management that describes
organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations in terms of ethical
structures, ethical processes and ethical performance. To our knowledge, this is an
under-investigated and appreciated area in contemporary research of organizational
chain management, if not overlooked or even ignored. From a managerial perspective,
it may be neglect that can cause serious damage in business practices to the corporate
identity, profiling efforts and image in the marketplace and society. Furthermore, the
organization’s trustworthiness, and at worst corporate survival, may be at stake (e.g.
Enron and Arthur Andersen), therefore, the objective of this paper is to introduce and
describe a conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics
across organizations in terms of ethical structures, ethical processes and ethical
performance. It is a basis for organizations to implement proper ethical values and
culture. Furthermore, it supports the proper actions of organizations in asymmetric
relationships of power and dependence.
There are various areas of ethical concerns across organizations. For example, on an
overall level there are both internal and external areas. Robin and Reidenbach (1987)
develop a multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business ethics, while
Huntet al. (1989) develop a corporate ethics scale. On the one hand, “business ethics”
has an external emphasis considering the gap between organizations’ ethical actions
and behaviour in ongoing business practices and the marketplace’s or society’s
perceptions of the organization’s ethical actions and behaviour in their business
practices (Svensson and Wood, 2004). “Corporate ethics”, on the other hand, has an
internal emphasis considering the gap between the management’s ethical actions and
behaviour and the staff’s perception of the management’s ethical actions and behaviour Corporate and
in ongoing business practices (Svensson and Wood, 2004). The conceptual framework business ethics
described and illustrated in the next section comprises a combination of both the
internal and external approaches of corporate and business ethics in the context across
organizations.

A conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics 23

across organizations
A conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations may be divided into four separate but at the same time interconnected
principal areas (see also Figure 1):
(1) across organizations;
(2) ethical structures;
(3) ethical processes; and
(4) ethical performance.

This conceptual framework relates in part to the work by Wood et al. (2004), Singh et al.
(2005) and Svensson and Wood (2008). The inherent structures, processes and
performance require ongoing monitoring and revision of the business practices across
organizations in order to determine whether the current relationships, business
operations and behaviors in and between organizations are ethical or unethical. On an
overall level, the conceptual framework should be seen as a continuous and iterative
process.
The conceptual framework is continuous as it contains a series of consecutive
organizations that are seen as mutually interdependent – that is, one depends upon the
other, and vice versa. It goes beyond corporate judicial boundaries and refers to the
ongoing attention to ethical concerns across organizations. We suggest in our
conceptual framework that incorporating corporate and business ethics across
organizations should be supported by the area of “structures” that underpin and
nurture ethical business practices in and between organizations. These structures lay
the groundwork to develop, manage and monitor ethical business practices across
organizations as a whole. Furthermore, it provides support for the area of “processes”
that demands organizations to perform sound current and future ethical business
practices. The last area of “performance” serves the purpose of evaluation and
maintenance of ethical business practices across organizations, and decides whether
they are ethical or not. This area enables the monitoring and control of the ethical
structures and processes of the conceptual framework.
The conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations is iterative as it asks for the ongoing and forthcoming revision between
structures, processes and performance. Each area is in turn linked and evaluated in
relation to the corporate and business ethics of each organization. The ethical
structures, ethical processes and ethical performance of the conceptual framework are
described and substantiated in the following paragraphs of this section. It should be
stressed that we do not contend that this conceptual framework is complete, but it
should be seen as a basis for further development and refinement in incorporating
ethical structures, ethical processes and ethical performance across organizations,
TLO
18,1

24

Figure 1.
A conceptual framework
of corporate and business
ethics across
organizations: structures,
processes and
performance
which to our knowledge has not been raised before in organizational chain Corporate and
management. business ethics
Across organizations
It is not an easy task to determine what may be classified as ethical or unethical
business practices across organizations as a whole. An essential factor is that there are
expectations and perceptions that vary between organizations. These expectations and 25
perceptions also vary in the marketplace and societies that surround organizations,
and that influence the predominant belief or conviction of what may, or may not, be
seen as ethical business practices.
There are several areas that contribute to this variable situation. For example,
government legislation may frame and define the criteria of ethical business practices
across organizations. Developed western style democracies have laws that govern the
expected and perceived actions and behaviours in business practices as they tend not
to be self-regulatory (Carson, 2003; Davies, 2001; Piety, 2004; Rondinelli, 2003).
Historically, they have been able to impact societies’ and their citizenry’s expectations
and perceptions of organizations’ business practices (Grit, 2004; Whawell, 1998).
Organizations are also confronted with societal expectations and perceptions beyond
purely economic issues, such as environmental and social change responsibilities
(Handelman, 2000; Handelman and Arnold, 1999).
With the awakening of globalization has come a realization in first world economies
that there are organizations who appear to have diverse sets of actions and behavioural
standards depending upon the country in which they find themselves at the time
(McMurtry, 2002; Sørensen, 2002).

Ethical structures
The area of “ethical structures” consists of the following sub-areas:
.
a code of ethics;
.
ethical audits;
.
ethics ombudsman;
.
ethics committee;
. ethics training committee; and
.
support to whistle-blowers.

The area of “ethical structures” is intended to support organizations’ ethical concerns

across organizations. There is a need for ethical structures that surround the modes in
which organizations strive to inculcate corporate and business ethics. Without them
there are no supports in place to create ethical processes and evaluate ethical
performance. This area serves as a support that the organization and its staff should be
able to relate to at the strategic, tactical and operational levels of business practices. It
is a point of reference to other stakeholders in the marketplace and society.
Code of ethics. A crucial sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual framework
of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is a code of ethics.
Since the early 1980s, a number of studies in the area of corporate codes of ethics have
been conducted in the USA (e.g. Cressey and Moore, 1983; Chonko et al., 2003), in the
UK (e.g. Le Jeune and Webley, 1998), in Canada (LeFebvre and Singh, 1992; Schwartz,
TLO 2002; Singh, 2006) in Sweden (Svensson et al., 2004), in Australia (Kaye, 1992; Farrell
18,1 and Cobbin, 1996; Wood, 2000; Wood and Callaghan, 2003). Code studies have been
also conducted on the largest multinational corporations operating across a range of
jurisdictions in the world (Bethoux et al., 2007; Singh et al., 2005; Wood et al., 2004).
Studies have found that having an ethical code does have a positive impact on the
ethical actions and behaviours of organizations (Adams et al., 2001; Schwartz, 2001;
26 Wotruba et al., 2001). Other studies have found this causal relationship not to be
conclusively the case (Ford et al., 1982; Clark and Leonard, 1998; McKendall et al.,
2002).
Stajkovic and Luthans (1997) see codes of ethics as one of the crucial parameters
that interact together to influence the ethical standards of organizations and their
individuals. Berenbeim (2000) sees codes of ethics as having a pivotal importance in
making a organization more ethical. Nijhof et al. (2003) suggest that a code once written
is not enough by itself to ensure a responsible ethical organization.
Ethical audits. Another sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual framework of
organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is the conduct of
ethical audits. A number of authors have suggested the need to incorporate ethical
audits into a organization’s processes (Crotts et al., 2005; Laczniak and Murphy, 1991;
Murphy, 1988). Garcia-Marza (2005) views the ethical audits as an integral part of the
process of developing trust, with the other factors in developing trust being the
existence of ethics codes, ethics ombudsman, ethics committees and ethics training
committees in organizations. “Within this integrated system of ethics management in
the organization, ethics auditing can respond to the basic objective of ethics
management, which is simply to integrate economic benefit with social and
environmental benefit” (Garcia-Marza, 2005, p. 211).
Ethics ombudsman. A third sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is the
presence of an ethics ombudsman. It is an area that has a relationship with another
sub-area of ethical structures, namely whistle blowing. Organizations need individuals
who are designated in this position, in order that individuals within the organization
who have genuine concerns can feel free to voice these concerns to an independent
arbiter (Crotts et al., 2005; Laczniak and Murphy, 1991; Murphy, 1988).
Ethics committee. A fourth sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual
framework of corporate and business ethics across organizations is the development of
an ethics committee. The development of ethics committes is an essential structure
recommended by a number of authors (Center for Business Ethics, 1986; Wood, 2002),
and as such they have been incorporated by organizations in many countries (Wood
et al., 2004) and it is believed that they may support the development, management and
monitoring of ethical business practices across organizations.
Ethics education committee. A fifth sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is the
establishment of an ethics training committee. Such a committee can provide a fruitful
environment in which staff can engage in discussion and have education in ethics in
situations that they might face whilst in the organization’s employ (Laczniak and
Murphy, 1991; Rampersad, 2003; Schwartz, 2002; Trevino and Brown, 2004).
Support of whistle-blowers. A sixth sub-area of ethical structures in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is the
support given to whistle blowers. If organizations are to evolve into ethical entities Corporate and
with ethical business practices, individuals must take both individual and collective business ethics
action to change the business practices that they see may be an antithesis to the ethical
health of the organization. Someone must make the move to expose violations of the
organization’s ethical principles. Formal guidelines to support whistle blowers should
be considered, because if standards are to be set then one needs ways to ensure that
either violations or breaches will be reported, reviewed and corrected (Wood, 2002). 27

Ethical processes
The area of “ethical processes” consists of the following sub-areas:
. ethical performance appraisal;
.
staff education;
.
aid in strategic planning;
. consequences for a breach;
.
communication of the code to organization workers;
.
dissemination of the code to new staff;
.
dissemination of the code to customers;
.
dissemination of the code to suppliers;
.
communiation of the code to other stakeholders; and
.
revision of the code.

There is a need to support the staff of the organization in different ways, otherwise
they will not know the corporate standpoint on ethical business practices. In particular,
staff may not know how to act and behave in situations requiring ethical
considerations. Organizations need to be aware that ethical values and principles
change over time and vary across contexts. It is therefore crucial to create processes
that contribute to regulating organizations’ ethical business practices, but also there
must be structures in place to support staff in their ethical actions and behaviors.
Ethical performance appraisal. A sub-area of ethical processes in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is
ethical performance appraisal. The need for organizations to implement an evaluation
of the ethical performance of staff through the staff appraisal system is supported by
Fraedrich (1992). Ethical performance appraisal should contribute to strengthen
corporate efforts to manage and monitor ethical business practices across
organizations.
Staff education. Another sub-area of ethical processes in the conceptual framework
of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is staff education.
An organization cannot just expect staff to be ethical to the level of the organization’s
expectations without having some involvement with training. A number of writers
have proposed the use of training programs as a means of institutionalizing ethics
within corporate business practices (Laczniak and Murphy, 1991; Maclagan, 1992;
Rampersad, 2003; Schwartz, 2002; Trevino and Brown, 2004). Staff education may also
influence the development and performance of ethical business practices across
organizations.
TLO Aid in strategic planning. A third sub-area of ethical processes in the conceptual
18,1 framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is as
an aid in strategic planning. Thomas et al. (2004) contend that leaders must think
strategically about how they ensure that they engender an ethical culture within the
organization. Leaders must have a vision to move their organization towards a better
corporate culture of ethical business practices. They must empower their staff to act in
28 ethical ways. Organizations should consider and review their plans in light of the
ethical principles that the organization believes that it should apply and upon which it
has predicated its decisions in respect to its participation in the marketplace and
society.
Consequences for a breach. A fourth sub-area of ethical processes in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is that
there should be consequences for a breach of the corporate code of ethics. A number of
writers contend that within a code one should outline enforcement provisions for those
individuals who do not uphold the code (Lere and Gaumnitz, 2003; Schwartz, 2002).
The concern here is that consequences for a breach, should not be just placed in the
code as a public relations exercise, but they should be implemented in all good faith as
a measure of commitment to developing the ethos of the code for the betterment of the
organization. The organization, by having procedures for a breach of the code, signals
to staff the significance of the need to abide by the code for both themselves and the
organization and effected stakeholders.
Communication of the code to the organization’s workers. A fifth sub-area of ethical
processes in the conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics
across organizations is the communication of the code to the organization’s workers.
The code has to be communicated to staff effectively and provide good examples of
what is required. Rushton (2002) suggests that progress towards an ethical
organization that is meaningful and real can only be achieved when the corporate
leaders bring about these changes. Leaders must be seen to make choices that support
the organization’s values regardless of the difficulty of that choice (Thomas et al.,
2004).
Dissemination of the code to new staff. A sixth sub-area of ethical processes in the
conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations is the dissemination of information on the code to new staff. New staff
are not to be forgotten. If new staff feel connected to their organization they will
subsume the ethos of the code of ethics. New staff members need to be active
participants in the organization (Crane et al., 2004) and staff should not have to
compromise their ethical standards to fulfil the organization’s requirements (Lovell,
2002). Satisfied staff members do not feel the need to become whistle blowers.
Dissemination of the code to customers. A seventh sub-area of ethical processes in
the conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations is that customers should be informed about the organization’s code.
Customers and other stakeholders should be seen as partners in the process of
developing organizational wealth, not as the means by which one develops it (Metcalfe,
1998).
Dissemination of the code to suppliers. An eighth sub-area of ethical processes in the
conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations is that suppliers should be informed about the organization’s code.
Many suppliers rely extensively on the continued goodwill of the organization. The Corporate and
power in the relationship usually resides with the organization. In most industries, a business ethics
range of alternate suppliers can be sourced. This organizational flexibility places
pressure upon the incumbent supplier to abide by the rules of the employing
organization (Crane et al., 2004). They should be seen as partners in a mutually
inclusive mission to create value for everyone across organizations. It is advisable to
get suppliers to embrace and contribute to the organization’s values and ethical 29
viewpoints – in extension, ethical business practices.
Communication of the code to other stakeholders. A ninth sub-area of ethical
processes in the conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics
across organizations is to keep other stakeholders informed (Svensson and Wood,
2008). The sentiments and views of other stakeholders are important to any
organization as they may be affected by the success and/or failure of the organization
(Heath and Norman, 2004). Good organizations do not differentiate between
institutional stakeholders and other stakeholders in the marketplace and society.
The welfare of all stakeholders should be treated equally regardless of the monetary
value that they represent to the organization. In sum, all stakeholders of the
organization are important to consider when one is to develop, manage and monitor
ethical business practices.
Revision of the code. A tenth sub-area of ethical processes in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is that
organizations should revise their code regularly. It is important that the corporate code
is not a static structure, but a flexible and living document. The marketplace and
society where organizations run their business operations evolve and adaptations may
be required across contexts and over time. In fact, research shows that codes tend to
evolve (Singh, 2006).

Ethical performance
The area of “ethical performance” consists of the following sub-areas:
.
resolving ethical dilemmas;
.
assist the bottom line; and
.
effectiveness of the code.

Theorists such as Levitt (1958) and Friedman (1962) would contend that the only
business performance worthy of examination is whether the organization made a profit
or a loss and how its business practices in the marketplace have impacted upon its
shareholders. Today, business practices require a different focus, and in particular in
respect to the ethical aspects of the organization’s business practices. Terms such as
triple bottom line, corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, and balanced
scorecard (Carroll, 1979; Heath and Norman, 2004; Joyner and Payne, 2002; Lovell,
2002) indicate a major change from the belief in previous eras that organizations are
only in existence to make profits.
Different stakeholders in the marketplace and society examine the economic
performance of organizations. Profit should be the natural performance measure of
their business practices (Lea, 1999). As Le Menestrel (2002, p. 158) says there is no
contradiction between ethical concerns and profits. Governments establish taxation
regimes that in essence are designed to ensure that businesses practices contribute to
TLO the maintenance of the society of which they are a part (Solomon and Martin, 2004).
18,1 Yet, profit does not guarantee that the business practices undertaken by organizations
to achieve this profit are in the best interests of the society, such that they are ethical.
Society goes through a set of checks and balances to ensure that the profit declared by
the organizations has been earned in ways that do not compromise the integrity of the
organization, the shareholders, the stakeholders and the society in general.
30 Resolving ethical problems. A sub-area of ethical performance in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is
whether the ethical structures and processes resolve ethical dilemmas across
organizations, and in extension the marketplace and society. Society and marketplace
stakeholders no longer judge an organization’s performance on profit alone.
Consideration of the ethical and socially responsible actions underlying profitability,
in conjunction with the other areas of the conceptual framework, should lead
organizations to aspire to being better corporate citizens in order to achieve ethically
long term profit. As the social conscience of many in the developed world became more
acute in the latter years of the twentieth century, then so too was there a corresponding
rise in the expectations of organizations to be better corporate citizens and to invest in
making the society a better place (Campbell et al., 2002; Rondinelli, 2003).
Assist the bottom line. Another sub-area of ethical performance in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is
whether the ethical structures and processes in place assist the bottom line of the
organization. Today it would appear that the stakeholders of first world economies
look more deeply at such profit declarations. The declaration of a profit or a loss is only
the first of a set of criteria upon which the marketplace and society evaluates the
performance of the organization. This is where ethical business practices become
crucial and may benefit the organization in both the short and the long term.
Effectiveness of the code. A third sub-area of ethical performance in the conceptual
framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is
regarding the effectiveness of the corporate code of ethics. International research has
shown that codes may have a certain impact on organizations’ performance in the
marketplace and society, though it is not easily quantified (Wood et al., 2004). Code
effectiveness is difficult to quantify because in the organization that is committed to an
ethical culture it should be one of many initiatives that act in concert to lift the ethical
perspectives and actions of the organization. For an organization not to have a code is
an automatic abrogation of their ethical responsibilities as a code should be a part of an
elaborate ethics tapestry that showcases the organization to the world.

Concluding thoughts and proposals for future research

A few concluding thoughts may be drawn from the introduced and described
conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate and business ethics across
organizations. The framework aspires to be dynamic as it has to be adapted to each
organization’s cultural context. The framework also argues that organizations’
corporate and business ethics across organizations should be seen as continuous and
iterative. There is no actual end of it, but a constant ethical attention and revision of
organizations’ business practices across organizations is needed. The areas and
sub-areas of the framework underpin the dynamics of this complexity as they provide
support on how to develop, manage and evaluate organizations’ ethical business Corporate and
practices across organizations. business ethics
We contend that the introduced conceptual framework of organizations’ corporate
and business ethics across organizations makes a contribution to the creation and
examination of ethical structures, ethical processes and ethical performance in the field
of organizational chain management The proposed framework rests upon the
challenge of combining the ethical concerns in business practices taking place between 31
organizations with the ethical concerns in the marketplace and across the societies
involved.
Expectations and perceptions in the marketplace and across societies initiate or
trigger the underpinnings of the framework by determining what concerns should be
addressed to achieve ethical business practices across organizations. The
organizations’ values, norms and beliefs considered in strategic, tactical and
operational business practices should match these expectations and perceptions. They
will be the fundament of internal and external perceptions that will be connected to an
organization’s achieved ethical performances. In turn, these perceptions underpin the
evaluations that societies will subsequently undertake. It is important to recognise that
ethical business practices across organizations are dependent upon the actions of staff
and their behaviours and they therefore need supporting structures and processes.
Consequently, organizations’ corporate and business ethics across organizations is
dependent upon existing ethical structures, ethical processes and ethical performance
measures. Organizations are interdependent and implicitly responsible together for the
ethical performance across organizations as perceived in the marketplace and across
societies. The globalization of business practices has led to organizations extending
their spheres of influence across countries and different continents where the ethical
values and principles tend to some extent to be different or variable to the
organization’s country of origin. This is a major challenge to be managed in
organizations’ aspirations to act and behave ethically in the marketplace and across
societies as all societies and marketplaces have their own culturally acceptable
practices and societal expectations.

References
Adams, J., Taschian, A. and Shore, T. (2001), “Codes of ethics as signals for ethical behavior”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 199-211.
Berenbeim, R. (2000), “Global ethics”, Executive Excellence, Vol. 17 No. 5, p. 7.
Bethoux, E., Didry, C. and Mias, A. (2007), “What codes of conduct tell us: corporate social
responsibility and the nature of the multinational corporation”, Corporate Governance,
Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 77-90.
Campbell, D., Moore, G. and Metzger, M. (2002), “Corporate philanthropy in the UK 1985-2000:
some empirical findings”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 39, pp. 29-41.
Carroll, A.B. (1979), “A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance”, Academy
of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 497-505.
Carson, T.L. (2003), “Self-interest and business ethics: some lessons of the recent corporate
scandals”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 43, pp. 389-94.
Carter, C.R. (2000), “Ethical issues in international buyer-supplier relationships: a dyadic
examination”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 191-209.
TLO Center for Business Ethics (1986), “Are corporations institutionalizing ethics?”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 85-91.
18,1
Chonko, L.B., Wotruba, T.R. and Loe, T.W. (2003), “Ethics code familiarity and usefulness: views
on idealist and relativist managers under varying conditions of turbulence”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 237-52.
Clark, M.A. and Leonard, S.L. (1998), “Can corporate codes of ethics influence behavior?”, Journal
32 of Business Ethics, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 619-30.
Cooper, R.W., Frank, G.L. and Kemp, R.A. (1997), “Ethical issues, helps and challenges:
perceptions of members of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply”, European
Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 189-98.
Crane, A. (2000), “Marketing and the natural environment: what role for morality?”, Journal of
Macro Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 144-54.
Crane, A., Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2004), “Stakeholders as citizens? Rethinking rights,
participation, and democracy”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53, pp. 107-22.
Cressey, D.R. and Moore, C.A. (1983), “Managerial values and corporate codes of ethics”,
California Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 53-77.
Crotts, J.C., Dickson, D.R. and Ford, R.C. (2005), “Aligning organizational processes with mission:
the case of service excellence”, The Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 54-68.
Davies, H. (2001), “Ethics in regulation”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 10 No. 4,
pp. 280-7.
De Boer, J. (2003), “Sustainability labelling schemes: the logic of their claims and their functions
for stakeholders”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 12, pp. 254-64.
Dyllick, T. and Hockerts, K. (2002), “Beyond the business case for corporate social
responsibility”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 11, pp. 130-41.
Farrell, B.J. and Cobbin, D.M. (1996), “A content analysis of codes of ethics in Australian
enterprises”, Journal of Management Psychology, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 37-55.
Ford, R., Gray, B. and Landrum, R. (1982), “Do organizational codes of conduct really affect
employees’ behaviour?”, Management Review, Vol. 72, pp. 53-4.
Fraedrich, J.P. (1992), “Signs and signals of unethical behavior”, Business Forum, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 13-17.
Friedman, M. (1962), Capitalism and Freedom, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Garcia-Marza, D. (2005), “Trust and dialogue: theoretical approaches to ethics auditing”, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 209-19.
Geraint, J. (2003), “Supply chains: hardest area to score on ethics”, Supply Management, Vol. 8
No. 7, pp. 11-15.
Grit, K. (2004), “Corporate citizenship: how to strengthen the social responsibility of managers”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53, pp. 97-106.
Handelman, J. (2000), “How marketers can ‘do well while doing good’: the institutional theory
framework”, in Spotts, H.E. and Meadow, H.L. (Eds), Developments in Marketing Science,
Vol. 23, p. 350.
Handelman, J.M. and Arnold, S.J. (1999), “The role of marketing actions with a social dimension:
appeals to the institutional environment”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 33-48.
Heath, J. and Norman, W. (2004), “Stakeholder theory, corporate governance and public
management: what can the history of state-run enterprises teach us in the post-Enron
era?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53, pp. 247-65.
Hoffman, A.J. (2000), Competitive Environmental Management: A Guide to the Changing Corporate and
Business Landscape, Island Press, Washington, DC.
Hunt, S.D., Van Wood, R. and Chonko, L.B. (1989), “Corporate ethical values and organizational
business ethics
commitment in marketing”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53, July, pp. 260-8.
ISO (2007), International Organization for Standardization, available at: www.iso.org
Joyner, B.E. and Payne, D. (2002), “Evolution and implementation: a study of values, business
ethics and corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 41, pp. 297-311. 33
Kaye, B.N. (1992), “Codes of ethics in Australian business corporations”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 11 No. 11, pp. 857-62.
Kidd, J. (2003), “Learning and trust in supply chain management: disintermediation, ethics and
cultural pressures in brief dynamic alliances”, International Journal of Logistics: Research
& Applications, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 259-76.
Laczniak, G.R. and Murphy, P.E. (1991), “Fostering ethical marketing decisions”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 259-71.
LeFebvre, M. and Singh, J. (1992), “The content and focus of Canadian corporate codes of ethics”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11 No. 10, pp. 799-808.
Le Jeune, M. and Webley, S. (1998), Company Use of Codes of Business Conduct, Institute of
Business Ethics, London.
Le Menestrel, M. (2002), “Economic rationality and ethical behaviour: ethical business between
venality and sacrifice”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 157-66.
Lea, D. (1999), “Corporate and public responsibility, stakeholder theory and the developing
world”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 151-62.
Lere, C.L. and Gaumnitz, B.R. (2003), “The impact of codes of ethics on decision making: some
insights from information economics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 365-79.
Levitt, T. (1958), “The dangers of social responsibility”, Harvard Business Review,
September-October, pp. 41-50.
Lippman, S. (1999), “Supply chain environmental management: elements for success”, Corporate
Environmental Strategy, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 175-82.
Lovell, A. (2002), “Ethics as a dependent variable in individual and organizational decision
making”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 37, pp. 145-63.
McKendall, M., DeMarr, B. and Jones-Rikkers, C. (2002), “Ethical compliance programs and
corporate illegality: testing the assumptions of the corporate sentencing guidelines”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 37, pp. 367-83.
Maclagan, P. (1992), “Management development and business ethics: a view from the UK”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 321-8.
McMurtry, J. (2002), “Why the protestors are against corporate globalization”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 40, pp. 201-5.
Metcalfe, C.E. (1998), “The stakeholder corporation”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 7
No. 1, pp. 30-6.
Min, H. and Galle, W.P. (1997), “Green purchasing strategies: trends and implications”, Journal of
Supply Chain Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 10-17.
Moberg, C.R. (2003), “Evaluating the relationship between questionable business practices and
the strength of supply chain relationships”, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 1-19.
Murphy, P.E. (1988), “Implementing business ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 7 No. 12,
pp. 907-15.
TLO Nijhof, A., Cludts, S., Fisscher, O. and Laan, A. (2003), “Measuring the implementation of codes of
conduct. An assessment method based on a process approach of the responsible
18,1 organisation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 45 Nos 1-2, pp. 65-78.
Peattie, K. (1995), Environmental Marketing Management: Meeting the Green Challenge, Pitman,
London.
Piety, M.G. (2004), “The long term: capitalism and culture in the new millennium”, Journal of
34 Business Ethics, Vol. 51, pp. 103-18.
Rampersad, H.K. (2003), “Linking self-knowledge with business ethics and strategy
development”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 246-57.
Reinhardt, F.L. (1999), “Bringing the environment down to the earth”, Harvard Business Review,
July-August, pp. 149-57.
Robin, D.P. and Reidenbach, R.E. (1987), “Social responsibility, ethics, and marketing strategy:
closing the gap between concept and application”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51, pp. 44-58.
Rondinelli, D.A. (2003), “Transnational corporations: international citizens or new sovereigns?”,
Business Strategy Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 13-21.
Rushton, K. (2002), “Business ethics: a sustainable approach”, Business Ethics: A European
Review, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 137-9.
Schwartz, M. (2001), “The nature of the relationship between corporate codes of ethics and
behaviour”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 32, pp. 247-62.
Schwartz, M.S. (2002), “A code of ethics for corporate code of ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 41 Nos 1-2, pp. 27-43.
Sheth, J.N. and Parvatiyar, A. (1995), “Ecological imperatives and the role of marketing”,
in Polonsky, M.J. and Mintu-Wimsatt, T. (Eds), Environmental Marketing: Strategies,
Practice, Theory and Research, Haworth Press, New York, NY.
Singh, J. (2006), “A comparison of the contents of the codes of ethics of Canada’s largest
corporations in 1992 and 2003”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 17-29.
Singh, J., Carasco, E., Svensson, G., Wood, G. and Callaghan, M. (2005), “A comparative study of
the contents of corporate codes of ethics in Australia, Canada and Sweden”, Journal of
World Business, Vol. 40, pp. 91-109.
Solomon, R. and Martin, C. (2004), Above the Bottom Line: An Introduction to Business Ethics,
3rd ed., Harcourt Brace, Fort Worth, TX.
Sørensen, A. (2002), “Value, business and globalization – sketching a critical conceptual
framework”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 39, pp. 161-7.
Stainer, A. (1997), “Logistics – a productivity and performance perspective”, Supply Chain
Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 53-62.
Stajkovic, A.D. and Luthans, F. (1997), “Business ethics across cultures: a social cognitive
model”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 17-34.
Svensson, G. (2007), “Aspects of sustainable SCM: conceptual framework and empirical
example”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 262-6.
Svensson, G. (2009), “The transparency of SCM-ethics: conceptual framework and empirical
illustrations”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 259-69.
Svensson, G. and Bååth, H. (2008), “Supply chain management ethics: conceptual framework and
illustration”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal (forthcoming issue).
Svensson, G. and Wood, G. (2004), “Corporate ethics and trust in intra-corporate relationships”,
Employee Relations Journal, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 320-36.
Svensson, G. and Wood, G. (2008), “A model of business ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Corporate and
Vol. 77, pp. 303-22.
Svensson, G., Wood, G. and Callaghan, M. (2004), “A comparison between corporate and public
business ethics
sector business ethics in Sweden”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 13 Nos 2/3,
pp. 166-84.
Thomas, T., Schermerhorn, J.R. Jr and Dienhart, J.W. (2004), “Strategic leadership of ethical
behavior in business”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 56-66. 35
Trevino, L.K. and Brown, M.E. (2004), “Managing to be ethical: debunking five business ethics
myths”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 69-81.
Welford, R. (1999), “Life cycle assessment”, in Welford, R. (Ed.), Corporate Environmental
Management 1: Systems and Strategies, Earthscan Publications, London.
Whawell, P. (1998), “The ethics of pressure groups”, Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 7
No. 3, pp. 178-81.
Wood, G. (2000), “A cross-cultural comparison of the contents of codes of ethics: USA, Canada
and Australia”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 287-98.
Wood, G. (2002), “A partnership model of corporate ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 40,
pp. 61-73.
Wood, G. and Callaghan, M. (2003), “Communicating the ethos of codes of ethics in corporate
Australia: 1995-2001: whose rights, whose responsibilities?”, Employee Responsibilities and
Rights Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 209-21.
Wood, G., Svensson, G., Singh, J., Carasco, E. and Callaghan, M. (2004), “Implementing the ethos
of corporate codes of ethics: Australia, Canada and Sweden”, Business Ethics: A European
Review, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 389-403.
Wotruba, T.R., Chonko, L.B. and Loe, T.W. (2001), “The impact of ethics code familiarity on
manager behaviour”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 33, pp. 59-69.
Young, A. and Kielkiewicz-Young, A. (2001), “Sustainable supply network management”,
Corporate Environmental Strategy, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 260-8.
Zikmund, W.G. and Stanton, W.J. (1971), “Recycling solid wastes: a channels of distribution
problem”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 34-9.
Zsidisin, G.A. and Siferd, S.P. (2001), “Environmental purchasing: a framework for theory
development”, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 7 No. 1,
pp. 61-73.

About the authors

Göran Svensson is a Professor at the Oslo School of Management, Norway. He holds a PhD at the
School of Economics and Commercial Law, Göteborg University, Sweden. Furthermore, he is a
committed member of the worldwide community of marketing/management research and
numerous international research and scholarly networks and associations worldwide. He has
been an industrialist and entrepreneur in South America. Göran Svensson is the corresponding
author and can be contacted at: goran.svensson@hh.se
Greg Wood is an Associate Professor in the School of Management and Marketing at Deakin
University, Australia. He holds a PhD from Deakin University. As well as nearly 20 years of
academic experience, he spent from 1981-1990 working for a multinational energy and resources
company and/or its affiliates. In his career, he has had a distinctive blend of commercial and
academic experience.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints