Human rights have traditionally been considered a domain of governments. The ongoing economic globalization, however, has rendered this state-centered view increasingly inadequate. In this contribution we will argue that also the powerful transnational corporations must bear more and more direct responsibility for the impact of their actions on human rights. Florian Wettstein and Sandra Waddock will first clarify the conceptual connection between existing approaches to corporate citizenship (CC) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the newly emerging "business and human rights" debate. Partly in contradiction to the "traditional" view on CSR/CC as a voluntary affair for business, we will then plea for mandatory human rights standards for corporations. However, human rights obligations are not always clear-cut and evident; especially so-called positive rights often create contingent and often highly ambiguous duties for many different actors.
Moral scheint ein sterbender Begriff zu sein, wenn man die Exzesse beispielsweise der Banken in der Finanzkrise betrachtet. Doch das wäre ein Trugschluss, wie die Reaktionen auf die Wulff-Affäre zeigen.
Ein Beitrag von Arne Gottschalck mit Kommentaren von Florian Wettstein und Thomas Beschorner.
Die globale Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise hat den Bedarf nach neuen, strafferen Regelwerken klar aufgezeigt. Regeln alleine werden in Zukunft jedoch kaum neue Krisen verhindern können. Dafür muss sich von Grund auf etwas an unserer Einstellung zum Wirtschaften ändern. Gebraucht wird ein neuer Schlag von Führungskräften. Integrität und eine organisationale Verantwortungskultur
sind für erfolgreiche Unternehmen unverzichtbar.
Die globale Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise hat den Bedarf nach neuen, strafferen Regelwerken klar aufgezeigt. Regeln alleine werden in Zukunft jedoch kaum neue Krisen verhindern können. Dafür muss sich von Grund auf etwas an unserer
Einstellung zum Wirtschaften ändern. Gebraucht wird ein neuer Schlag von Führungskräften. Integrität und eine organisationale Verantwortungskultur sind für erfolgreiche Unternehmen unverzichtbar.
More and more companies are publicly taking a stand on social and political issues such as gay marriage legislation. This paper argues that this type of engagement, which can be called ‘‘corporate political advocacy,'' raises new conceptual and normative challenges especially for theories of corporate responsibility. Furthermore, it poses practical challenges for managers who are confronted with it. This paper addresses all three challenges: first, it defines and conceptualizes corporate political advocacy and dis- tinguishes it from other forms of corporate political in- volvement. Second, it makes normative sense of corporate advocacy as an element of corporate responsibility. Third, it reflects on the practical implications for managers deal- ing with this issue.
Recent months have heralded a surge in companies publicly taking a stand on social and political issues such as gay marriage legislation. This paper argues that such "corporate political advocacy" raises new conceptual challenges, which have not been accounted for in existing theories of the firm. Furthermore, it poses normative challenges not yet addressed in current theories of corporate responsibility. And lastly, it poses practical challenges and dilemmas for managers who are confronted with it in their own organizations. This article addresses all three challenges: first, it defines corporate political advocacy and distinguishes it from other, perhaps more familiar forms of corporate political involvement. Second, it attempts to make normative sense of corporate advocacy by depicting it as an element of corporate responsibility. Third, it reflects on the practical implications deriving for managers dealing with this issue in practice.
The significance of multinationals in shaping globalization is largely undisputed. This paper argues that any agent of substantial change should, at the same time, be an agent of justice. However, while multinational companies have played instrumental roles in shaping the world in the past, they have done so with seemingly little genuine concern for the systematic advancement of global justice. Granted that the corporate social responsibility movement is still making strides, but it arguably only scratches the surface of a more holistic understanding of corporations as agents of justice. An understanding of corporations as agents of justice crystallizes around their impact on the structure of society. In other words, a perspective on justice addresses the political role and stature of multinational companies. It is, fundamentally, about corporate power and influence - and about the political responsibilities that are inevitably connected to it.
