Creating Ties That Bind

Author(s): R. Edward Freeman and Jared D. Harris

Source: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 88, Supplement 4: A Tribute to Thomas W. Dunfee a
Leader in the Field of Business Ethics (2009), pp. 685-692
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27749740 .
Accessed: 21/06/2014 18:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Business Ethics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Journal of Business Ethics (2009) 88:685-692
? Springer2009
DOI 10.1007/sl0551-009-0333-4

R. Edward Freeman

Creating Ties That Bind Jared D. Harris

ABSTRACT. The work ofDonaldson and Dunfee (Ties I

That Bind: A Social ContractsApproach toBusiness Ethics,
1999) offersan example of how normative and descriptive In their magisterial work, Ties That Bind: A Social
approaches to business ethics can be integrated.We Contracts Approach to Business Ethics, Donaldson and
suggest that to be truly integrative,however, the theory Dunfee to a view of ethical
(1999) attempt square
should explore the processes by which such integra
theory built on the idea of social contracts with
tion happens. We, therefore, sketch some preliminary
much of the existing literature in business ethics. In
thoughts that extend Integrative Social Contracts Theory
(ISCT) by beginning to consider the process by which doing so, they hope to place business ethics on fir
contracts are connected to
mer philosophical footing. In this article we suggest
microsocial hypernorms.
that, their integrative social contracts theory articu
KEY WORDS: integrative social contracts theory, lates an important and useful set of ideas ripe for
hypernorms,moral disagreement, reflective equilibrium further development and extension, whereas it does
not fully escape the problems they attempt to solve.
We have much sympathy for the idea of a contrac
tual account ethics, and therefore, we
of business
seek to extend their ideas with an approach that
views the moral "ties that bind" from more of a
R. Edward Freeman is Elis and Signe Olsson Professorof
process perspective, as a conversation among en
Business Administration;Co-Director of theOlsson Center
gaged moral actors.We outline our approach here in
for Applied Ethics; and, Academic Director of theBusiness honor of Tom Dunfee, who was an important
Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics at theDarden conversational over
partner many years.1
School, University of Virginia. His major researchand are concerned with two
Donaldson and Dunfee
teaching interests are in stakeholder theory, strategic man
agement,and business ethics.His latestbook, Stakeholder problems that they see in the business ethics litera
ture. The first is the lack of integration between
Theory: The State of theArt, (coauthoredwith Jeffrey
normative and empirical approaches to the field; let
Harrison, Andrew Wicks, Bidhan Parmar and Simone
us call this the problem of integration. The second is
DeColle) will bepublished byCambridgeUniversityPress in
2009. His work has appeared in Journal of Business what they call, following Nagel (1986), "the view
Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly, Organization Sci from nowhere."

ence, Academy ofManagement Review, Academy of

Management Journal, and a varietyof otherjournals,
fared D. Harris is a seniorfellow at theOlsson Center for The problem of integration
Applied Ethics and a fellow at theBusiness Roundtable
for Corporate Ethics at theDarden School, Uni
Institute
As business ethics has evolved as a discipline, it has
versityof Virginia, where he teachescourses in bothEthics attracted a more diverse group of scholars from a
and Strategy. His research centers on the interplay between
number of disciplines; an increasing number of social
management,with a particular
business ethicsand strategic
on the topics of corporate governance and
scientistsemploying empirical research methods
focus interorgani
zational trust.His work has appeared inOrganization have joined the conceptual analyses of philosophers
Science, Business Ethics Quarterly, and Journal of who were the early founders of the discipline. This
Business Ethics. brings a certain pluralism to the field; while many

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 686R. Edward Freeman and Jared D. Harris

management scholars are concerned with collecting tractual mechanism such as the one used by John
better data and making more accurate predictions, Rawls, do not exist merely as abstract, general prin
philosophers have continued their analysis from the ciples. Rather, Donaldson and Dunfee suggest that
viewpoint, largely, of analytical ethics. Philosophical we take seriously the idea that there are local norms
business ethics is grounded in the normative ethical and principles which may well apply, especially in
analysis of the relevance of principles, consequences, business, grounding the norms as something more
or character, with management scholars attending to concrete than generalized rules of thumb. They
the related descriptive and predictive investigations suggest that we combinethe idea of overarching
of actual organizational behavior. And as we have hypernorms (based on macrosocial contracts) with the
recently pointed out, an increasing number of extant "microsocial contracts" to form what they call
scholars study both philosophical/normative texts and integrative social contracts theory (ISCT).
managerial/empirical texts (Harris and Freeman, The hypernorms are the focal point of a key
2008). Donaldson and Dunfee's work was an early tension that ISCT hopes to resolve. Donaldson and
clarion call to think about business ethics in this kind Dunfee want to avoid charges of relativism by
of integrated way; they strive to put forward a theory retaining the philosophical certainty of the big
that shows how such integration can be achieved. principles, or hypernorms, which we would perhaps
agree to behind a veil of ignorance. However, they
also want to embody pragmatic relevance in their
The viewfrom nowhere theory by letting particular communities influence
the acceptable norms of behavior. This central ten
The second problem is related to the problem of sion is governed by one important boundary con
-
integration the separation of normative and dition: these local norms can vary and change,
- see the
descriptive because Donaldson and Dunfee provided they inhabit a "moral free space" that does
pervasive ethical "view from nowhere" as an not materially conflict with the hypernorms, which
examination from only an abstract point of view. are taken as axiomatic, and look much like the idea
Particular detail iswiped away to "discover" general of universal human rights (Donaldson and Dunfee,
philosophical principles or truths. This view from 1999, p. 83). In order to assess ISCT's treatment of
nowhere can be sterile and ultimately impotent since the twoproblems that Donaldson and Dunfee
it is overly stylized and does not clearly connect to identify and set out to solve, let us consider the role
concrete actions. Due in large part to the efforts of of the hypernorms.
scholars such as Tom Dunfee, there are now more
legal scholars involved in the discipline, who are
rooted in the details of business law and particular II
cases; legal analyses tend to dissolve the normative/
empirical distinction, viewing the law as at once There are several
different ways to understand
both normative and empirical. Nevertheless, Don Donaldson and Dunfee's use of hypernorms. On the
aldson and Dunfee point out that the gap between one hand, we might understand ISCT's
hypernorms
and concrete advice, especially in as strongly axiomatic,
general principle privileged, and ultimately a
normative work in business ethics, is quite wide. sterile "view from nowhere" smuggled into the
In order to address these problems, Donaldson and theory. If this is accurate, then it is not clear that
Dunfee propose a solution to these problems based on ISCT gets us very far along the road to integration;
the idea of social contracts. They suggest that the rather, the normative is simply privileged, and
general ideas of "fair contract" and "hypothetical hypernorms become the bedrock. While there is
?
consent" which have been important pieces of the certainly a spirit of integration from which the book
social contract tradition since Locke ? remain as the iswritten, there is simply not much actual integra
philosophical keystones, but in a complicated and tion if, in fact, the normative hypernorms trump
global business world, they yield only the view from everything else.
nowhere. They suggest that there are many "hyper On the other hand, we might instead understand
norms" which, while ultimately justified by a con the hypernorms as fairlyminimalist floor values or

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Creating Ties That Bind 687

guidelines thatmost of us can agree on (e.g., all else in moral space have to be consistent with
free

equal, we should not harm innocents). In this sense, hypernorms, and because hypernorms give only the
the hypernorms are not so much privileged, most generic guidance, there will always be an
monolithic, or sovereign, but in the end this also argument about whether particular microsocial
means that they are ultimately not very specific or contracts are consistent with hypernorms. If ISCT is
directive, either. Therefore, hypernorms might to achieve its promise, then, we suggest that the
always be present in the background, but consist most important consideration here is not necessarily
mainly of bromides that could be interpreted a the actual hypernorm, or the particulars of the
number of differentways. In either case, this implies microsocial contract, but rather the ensuing con
that ISCT does not really resolve the integration versation and process that is of necessity about the

problem or the view from nowhere problem?at connectionbetween general principles (so-called "thin
least, not yet. morality") and specific community and individual
We like to suggest that Donaldson
would and practice (so-called "thick morality").
Dunfee point us a
in fruitful direction, but that the We, therefore, suggest it would be useful for
promise of their project is not yet fully realized. ISCT to explore the very process of entanglement
Elsewhere, we have argued that separating the nor between macro and micro levels of social contracts as
-
mative from the descriptive is actually impossible, it applies to all of our institutions and practices of
because one cannot single out specific "facts" from which business (or, value creation and trade) is one.
their underlying narratives (Harris and Freeman, In order to do this,we have to pay more attention to
2008). This means that ethics are embedded in the the conversations that exist and the resulting pro
generalized meaning of words and concepts (e.g., cesses that occur to connect these levels. Our aim
Searle, 1964), as well as in the actual practice of here is to take a process view of ISCT, touching on
economic action and transaction (e.g., Granovetter, several mechanisms that may connect microsocial
1985). And while Donaldson and Dunfee outline a contracts and macro hypernorms.
theoretical framework by which integration is It isworth noting that our argument here might
advocated, they stop short of actually showing how also be construed more broadly, suggesting that
such integration would be achieved. In other words, ultimately we need to think about the process by
we suggest that although Donaldson and Dunfee are, which Kantian, Utilitarian, social contract, or virtue
in fact, trying to escape the separation of the nor based issues are, in fact, all connected to custom and
mative and the descriptive, they do not go quite far practice. Part of understanding these connections
enough. involves the pragmatic role of language itself. Tra
This becomes ? ?
they describe their
clear when ditional ethical theory and its attendant language
project as focusing on "economic matters" (p. 27). must be employed beyond a simple focus on ethical
The social contract as detailed in their four principles judgments, decisions that must be made or not
refers to "local economic communities" and curi made, and defining applying terms such as
and
ously to "economic ethics." In their attempt to "right," "wrong," "good," "bad," etc. to these
in hypernorms and states of affairs. - we
ground economic differences What gets lost ifwe stop there if
macrosocial contracts, they have, perhaps, unwill succumb to a generalized view from nowhere - is
ingly accepted the conceptual separation of eco the messy, gritty, real world of moral sense making
nomics ethics only to try and put them
from and problem solving that is so important to our daily
together again. A different approach is to eschew the lives.

separation in the first place. There is no separable Yet, we also do not want to overstate the extent
"economic ethics," and conversely, there is no towhich differing uses of language are what separate
ethics without considering how human beings create the gritty from the abstract; in other words, this is
value trade with each other. If they are not
and not simply (or even primarily) a language issue. In
separate, then they will have no need to be inte fact,much of analytical business ethics is not stylized
or sterile, but, in fact, is embroiled in the
grated. particulars
So what is the problem here? We conceive of it of practice, illustrated by particular cases, and
thisway: within the ISCT framework, all decisions explicitly applied to real-world problems. Indeed,

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. Edward Freeman and fared D. Harris
688

Donaldson and Dunfee themselves set out to return the term purely descriptively to single out and depict
the messy world of business to business ethics, by customers, suppliers, employees, communities, and
focusing on microsocial contracts and the differences financiers. On the other hand, we could use the
among them. This points us in the right direction, term to make the rights and responsi
claims about
but we want to expand their view of moral language bilities of these groups and of corporations.3 How
and conversation and dialog and engagement to fo ever, the embedded sensemaking idea in this
cus on the process by which micro and macro are example is more subtle. By invoking the term
connected. IfDonaldson and Dunfee are correct that "stakeholder," we are implicitly giving legitimacy to
we need a more
detailed and nuanced view of the the groups we reference that way, i.e., they must
-
connection between general principles hyper have a stake. By using the term "stakeholder," we
norms - contracts that a variety are engaging in an intentional play on the terms
and themicrosocial
of communities enact, then we need to pay more "shareholder" and "stockholder," changing only
attention to the process connecting these levels. two letters of each word to invoke a more general
idea. By merely using the framing of "stakeholder,"
we invoke both the descriptive and normative at the
Ill same time. The two realms are entangled through
the use of their connectedconcepts. Of course, for
We shall sketch out an initial, extended view of some purposes, we can focus on either the more
ISCT that focuses on the process of coming to descriptive or more normative uses of the term, but
agreement about the ties that bind, and starts to that does not avoid their entanglement.
explore the dynamics of the set of conversations that This point is equally clear in the idea of social
occurs and/or could occur among community par contracts. Merely by using the framing of "social
ticipants deliberating moral problems.2 There are a contracts" and recommending thatwe make sense of
number of connected ideas here, which we sketch in business through "social contracts," Donaldson and
the following paragraphs. Dunfee are having us view business as a normal part
of society rather than somehow separate from soci
ety. The very discussion of business using the lan
The primacy offraming and sensemaking guage of social contracts invokes the idea of the
integration of business with society. The idea of
The use of language, while not the
only thing that is "contract" is also connected to choice and agree
important here, is a good starting point. Language ment, and the ideas of reciprocity and performance.
helps usmake sense of theworld, and is almost always What does not seem to fit ? and we believe that
inextricably normative and descriptive. Language is Donaldson and Dunfee can simply do without it- is
about meaning-making and shared understanding. the idea of "economic "Economic
community."
For Donaldson and Dunfee's project, the lan community" seems to thatwe can separate out
signal
guage of social contracts frames the idea of business "economic" from the rest of what counts as "soci
in a particular way. It at once enables and constrains ety." And at times (see p. 40ff. and p. 98ff.), "eco
the discussion about the connection of business to nomic community" can refer to a corporation, a
society. Social contracts help us to make sense of state, or just a regular community.4
business and society in a certain way, and this helps How we make sense of business is logically con
to set the guidelines for what we see as the primary nected to the concepts thatwe use in setting up the
dilemmas of business. Using the language of social idea of microsocial contracts. And if microsocial
contracts is an illustration of exactly what we mean contracts are to emerge and be connected to mac

here by the sensemaking role of language. It is often rosocial contracts and hypernorms, asDonaldson and
this sensemaking use of language that blurs the dis Dunfee suggest, there must be a conversation about
tinction between what is empirical and what is the role of business. Again, this is not a purely
normative.
descriptive or purely normative task. Donaldson and
For an example, consider the use of the concept Dunfee are clearly committed to the idea that
of "stakeholder." On the one hand, we could use business is a deeply human institution, and even their

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Creating Ties That Bind 689

"economic communities" are moral in nature. Yet, universal human right, especially when it prevents a
much of the language of business is presented in child from learning basic education, or leads to

many contexts as morally neutral or solely descrip health and welfare issues which will prevent the
tive. At the same time, there have been many recent child from leading ameaningful life. If the argument

critiques of business in the last several years. How stays at this level, there is an inherent conflict be
ever, it is easy to see customers and other stake tween the microsocial contract and the hypernorm.
holders as moral beings. Marketing consists of And inDonaldson and Dunfee's scheme, thewinner
promises. Ideas, such as supply chain management, appears to be the hypernorm. However, taking a
involve getting human beings to cooperate together process view of ISCT, things become more com
so that all of them win. These key concepts, which plicated.
make up particular microsocial contracts, have ethics Perhaps, it would be more interesting to see if
case that there is not some reconciliation between these two
already built into their fabric. It is not the
moral free space ismorally neutral; rather, it is full of levelsof analysis. Child labor per se might be
moral complexity. understood as something that is, generally speaking,
morally problematic. The concept calls up meaning
for us precisely because we see it against a back
The role of background narratives ground of the innocence of childhood where
growth and
development are more central and
Any particular piece of language brings its back appropriate than the vagaries of hard labor. Yet,
ground conditions and theories with it; it is always the employment of minors might sometimes be
embedded in context.5 Indeed, Donaldson and necessary to help feed a family, or simply for self
Dunfee call up a number of background ideas and preservation. We might distinguish child labor on a
images by the very use of themetaphor of the social family farm from the grinding exploitation of
contract. A social contract is broader than any sweatshops, for example. We could distinguish child
individual; yet, it implies there is some role for the labor where at least some education was built into
idea of agreement and choice. However, it is far the process, from obvious deprivation and humilia
from clear what happens to an individual who does tion.We might be able to design a mid-level set of
not agree to the social contract. It is also easy to see principles that could help determine whether a
how framing business ethics in terms of social con particular microsocial contract about child labor
tracts can lead to a concern with so-called "saints and could be justified.
sinners." Ifmacrosocial contracts are to be under
stood in terms of hypernorms, and if the test of any
particular locally authentic norm inmoral free space Moral imagination and reflectiveequilibrium
is whether it violates any hypernorms, then those
communities (or companies) which violate hyper Such a process might include a comparison of one
norms will be viewed as sinners, since hypernorms microsocial contract with another, rather than just
are universal. Those who never violate hypernorms with the hypernorm. Indeed, this process may well
will be the saints. Hence, certain companies are grow to look like what Rawls (1971) calls "reflec
vaunted for their exemplary behavior, and others are tive equilibrium." We start with some principles
vilified for their actions, as judged by some analytical (hypernorms) that represent our best thinking so far,
(or perhaps arbitrary) standard.6What ismissing here but we realize that even
these principles are revis
is the connection between a local micosocial norm able. We then look at particular cases that challenge
and the hypernorms themselves. What is the con these principles, such as authentic norms built into
versation that is to be had regarding whether a local existing microsocial contracts. The principles stand
norm violates hypernorms? in relation to the cases, as the relation of theory to
A controversial
example involves local norms new data. Either the new data confirm or are con

regarding child labor. In many local economic sistent with the principles, the data are rejected as
communities, child labor is viewed as a necessity. flawed, or we may need to revise our principles.
Yet, many have argued that child labor violates a This process is neither easy nor problem free, but it

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. Edward Freeman and fared D. Harris
690

norms. However,
does describe one useful way to see how microsocial complete action-guiding set of if
contracts can be connected to macrosocial hyper we can connect the company values to itsunderlying
norms, in a over time. purpose and business model, then it is somewhat
dynamic way
we start from easier to frame a set of decisions thatmust be made.
Reflective equilibrium means that
where we actually are. It is here thatDonaldson and For instance, Wal-Mart's obsession with
everyday
Dunfee remind us that we have both hypernorms low price is inherently connected with itspurpose of

(general principles) and a set of practices inmoral free trying to bring goods and services to communities at
space (microsocial contracts), which may reinforce or the lowest possible price. Sam Walton believed that
violate these macro principles. The ISCT contention people in rural and poorer communities deserved to
that there are no morally legitimate microsocial con have better goods available to them. Now, of course
tractswhich violate hypernorms would be stronger Wal-Mart does not always make the correct decision
when the connection between the emergence of about whether a particular action is consistent with

practices and hypernorms

were more explicit. As that purpose, but the purpose and resulting values
Donaldson and Dunfee rightly point out, inmoral free do, in fact, frame the decision inways that connect it
space, it is very difficult to determine whether prac with hypernorms of efficiency and equality. If there
tices violate principles. Much depends on interpreta is a conflict either between these principles or with
tion, and as they argue, tolerance is a real virtue. another norm that gains salience, such as sustain
ability, then Wal-Mart must through an
then go
exercise of reflection and reframing. They must
The role of disagreement begin to make sense of their moral world utilizing
the concept of "sustainability" and hence reframe
If conversations about microsocial contracts and what theymean by "everyday low price."
their connections to hypernorms are to be mean The traditional ideas of ethical theory form the

ingful ones inside

companies, or
economies or basis for understanding how has a conversation about
communities or societies, then there must be a real the nature of the conflict between microsocial con
role formeaningful difference. This implies that such tracts, and between levels. One
way to think about
conversations must already be framed in terms of this process is to formulate a set of questions that
mutual respect and tolerance. Of course, these ideas managers and theorists need to ask when faced with a
have limits, as extreme tolerance may imply extreme conflict. Atleast one of these questions needs to
disrespect. In the world of business practice, com appeal to our imagination and offer alternative
panies are constantly grappling with how tomanage framings, meanings, and ways to make sense of
in an increasingly diverse economic environment. the phenomena. This process of using the tension
Large global companies are, perhaps, different from between microsocial contracts and hypernorms as
local community-based businesses, and we might a motivation to engage our moral imagination
expect a different set of norms to emerge. The fact (Werhane, 1999) isnot well understood, but we argue
thatDonaldson and Dunfee allow for such difference that this friction inherently offers an opportunity to
seems to be one of the strengths of their theory. see ISCT as a more realistic management process.

Stronger still wouldbe an understanding of the

connection between local community-centric norms
and wider global ones. IV
In many senior encour
companies, management

ages conversations about company values. Some
times, these company values could be read straight
off of Donaldson and Dunfee's list of hypernorms,
and rarely will these company values
outright violations of hypernorms. However, in
these conversations, much is a matter of interpreta
tion. Hypernorms can conflict. Dilemmas abound
when the company values are put forward as a
Seeing ISCT as more of a process points business
ethics in a different direction from a more standard
application of universal principles, consequences, and
countenance character. It points us toward understanding how
conversations emerge among human individuals and
community. It places center stage the questions of
how we are going to live together, and how we are
going to create our joint futures, especially focusing

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Creating Ties That Bind 691

2
on how we create value and tradewith each other. It The challenge of connecting microsocial contracts
moves us away from an over reliance on making with hypernorms bears some similarity to the issue of
a system of actors that lack com
moral judgments as the first virtue of resolving moral disagreement
-
among
mon normative a common
business ethics, and toward a nuanced view of how ground problem. Although
discourse ethics (e.g., Habermas, 1990) approaches this
business activity gets framed, understood, argued
sense of business only in challenge mainly as a problem ofmoral justification, oth
about, and enacted. Making
ers (e.g., Painter-Moreland, 2008; Stansbury, 2009) have
economic terms already gives away the game to those
begun to focus on the application of discourse ethics to
who that business ethics is an oxymoron, or it
believe contexts.
organizational
means need a special section for applied
that we 3
See Donaldson and Preston (1995) for a fuller dis
-
(or "economic") ethics and as such, raises the cussion of these distinctions.
of whether such ethics has depended for its 4
question IfDonaldson and Dunfee had simply leftout "eco
development on the purely economic view of busi nomic" and made sense of microsocial contracts in
ness. In contrast, framing business as just another in a terms of "communities", then we would see "business"
as a normal part of "community". The problem is that
long list of human institutions and activities makes
ethics applicable to business. Making sense of value there would not appear to be a special role of "eco
creation and trade as something thatwe humans have nomic ethics" here. That doesn't seem to be a problem
unless one is worried about keeping a special role for
done formillennia then ironically raises the question
"business ethics" within either philosophical or man
of the adequacy of a philosophical ethics that has
agement theory.
denied business a place inmoral theory. 5
Language shapes how we see theworld. Words shape
Seeing ethics asmore of a conversation among real our actions. Philosophers such asWittgenstein, Dewey,
- -
rather than hypothetical moral actors points us
Quine, Putnam, Davidson, and Rorty have outlined a
away from a business ethics that is enmeshed in view of language that relies on understanding themulti
as saints
judgments about companies and capitalism ple tasksof language, rather than searching for a particular
and sinners.Warren Buffet is reputed to have said that meaning or set ofmeanings. Wittgenstein's ([1952]2001)
all saints have a past and all sinners have a future. Just as idea of "don't ask for the meaning, ask for the use"
few of our children are either purely saints or purely reminds us that language shapes what we do, how we
sinners, so too are our companies. Making sense of interact with each other, and how we create meaning for

business in a "thickly moral" sense builds in the same each other. Quine's (1960) view of the indeterminacy of
translation illustrates how and conversation
kind of emotional commitment to being responsible interpretation
are always an issue. Ifpart of the normative taskof schol
thatwe hope to transmit to our children. Ifwe begin
ars is to show us how to live better, then the Duhem
to see business as one more way that human beings
metaphor of rebuilding the shipwhile it remains afloat
create meaning for ourselves and others, thenwe will
shows the connection between themicro realworld (the
see ethics as concerned with authenticity and change,
ship) and making it better (the rebuilding). Putnam
power and authority, leadership, imagination, and the (2002) asks us to see such an entanglement of facts and
creation of sustainable value. Donaldson and Dunfee values (and forDewey ([1927] 1954), means and ends) as
have pointed us down this more nuanced path in a normal part of the way that language works, even in
business ethics. By paying attention to ethics as a science (Kuhn, 1962). Rorty (1981) reminds us that the
whole edifice of the "meaning" of the words simply
deeply human undertaking, enmeshed in language
and dynamic in nature, we can not takes theGreek ocular metaphor far past where it is use
only better
understand the role of business in society but also ful.Our "web of belief (c.f. Quine, 1951) is always
create even better ties that bind. revisable, and Davidson (2001) reminds us of language's
constitutive role in themaking ofmeaning.
6
This highlights a related problem: what to make of
inconsistency of actions? Merck is a saint for donating
Notes Mectizan (in perhaps the most famous case in business
ethics), but then they are proclaimed sinners for their
1
Though this essay is in honor of Tom Dunfee, Tom behavior in the Vioxx case. The recognition of both
Donaldson is one of our important conversational part and the connection between
organizational complexity
ners as well, and we thank him for his helpful feedback microsocial norms and generalized hypernorms might
on an earlier draft. be useful inmaking sense of these kinds of actions.

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 R. Edward Freeman and fared D. Harris
692

References Quine, W. V. O.: 1951, 'Two Dogmas of Empiricism',

The PhilosophicalReview 60(1), 20-43.
Davidson, D.: 2001, Inquiries Into Truth and Interpretation Quine, W. V. O.: 1960, Word and Object (MIT Press,
(Oxford University Press, New York). Cambridge).
Dewey, J.: [1927]1954, The Public and Its Problems (Ohio Rawls, J.: 1971, A Theory ofJustice (Harvard University
University Press, Athens, Ohio). Press, Cambridge).
Donaldson, T. and T. Dunfee: 1999, Ties That Bind: A Rorty, R.: 1981, Philosophy and theMirror of Nature
Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics (Harvard (PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton).
Business School Press, Cambridge). Searle, J. R.: 1964, 'How to Derive
"Ought" From "Is',

Donaldson, T. and L. Preston: 1995, 'The Stakeholder The PhilosophicalReview 73(1), 43-58.
Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Stansbury, J.: 2009, 'Reasoned Moral Agreement:
Implications', Academy ofManagement Review 20(1), Applying Discourse Ethics within Organizations',
65-91. Business Ethics Quarterly 19(1), 33-56.
Granovetter, M.: 1985, 'Economic Action and Social Werhane, P. H.: 1999,Moral ImaginationandManagement
Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness', The DecisionMaking (Oxford University Press, New York).
AmericanJournal ofSociology91(3), 481-510. Wittgenstein, L.: [1952J2001, Philosophical Investigations.
Habermas, J.: 1990, Moral Consciousness and Communicative (Trans. G. E. M. Anscombe) (Blackwell, Oxford).
Action (Trans. C. Lenhardt and S.W. Nicholsen) (MIT
Press, Cambridge). R. Edward Freeman and Jared D. Harris
Harris, J. D., and R. E. Freeman: 2008, "The Impossi Elis and Signe Olsson Professor of
bility of the Separation Thesis", Business Ethics Quar Business Administration,
terly,18(4), 541-548. Darden School ofBusiness Administration,
Kuhn, T. S.: 1962, The Structureof ScientificRevolutions
University of Virginia,
(University of Chicago Press, Chicago). Box 6550, Charlottesville, VA 22906-6550, U.S.A.
Nagel, T.: 1986, The View fromNowhere (Oxford Uni E-mail: freemane@darden.virginia.edu
versity Press, New York).
Painter-Moreland, M.: 2008, Business Ethics as Practice:

Ethics as theEveryday Business ofBusiness (Cambridge Jared D. Harris

E-mail: harrisj@darden.virginia.edu
University Press, Cambridge).
Putnam, H.: 2002, The Collapse of theFact/Value Dichot
omy (HarvardUniversity Press, Cambridge).

This content downloaded from 62.122.79.31 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 18:46:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions