State of Indiana V. Ford Motor Company revisited

Becker, Paul J.; Jipson, Arthur J.; Bruce, Alan S.

doi:10.1007/bf02887826

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, the very fact that a corporation faced a criminal charge was novel at the time, and some felt that the state of Indiana had won a victory insofar as the judge did not accept Ford's motion to dismiss the case at the outset. As Becker et al (2002) note, when Ford executives were asked what they recalled about liability verdicts before the Pinto prosecution, they responded that they had only vague recollections about individual cases. The president thought it would be irresponsible of him to order the redesign of a vehicle simply because of ''some jury verdict somewhere.''…”

Section: Trends In Legal Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward an Intermediate Position on Corporate Moral Personhood

Gibson

2011

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of moral responsibility rely on foundational views about moral agency. Many scholars believe that only humans can be moral agents, and therefore business needs to create models that foster greater receptivity to others through ethical dialog. This view leads to a difficulty if no specific person is the sole causal agent for an act, or if something comes about through aggregated action in a corporate setting. An alternate approach suggests that corporations are moral agents sufficiently like humans to be treated as persons, which leads to questions of intentionality and the organizational structure required to support the claim. In this article, I make an intermediate claim combining Goodpaster and Matthews' (60:132-141, 1982) view that a corporation may have a moral culture which affects subjective choices, with those of PainterMorland (17(3):515-534, 2007) who points out that we should move from a model that posits discrete persons acting on each other to one where morality comes about through shared experience between agents who participate in each other's lives. I argue that the discussion has been trapped in traditional dichotomies, and is better served by language that more accurately represents the dynamic interplay between organization and individual. I underwrite this claim by looking at recent changes in British and American legal approaches to corporate responsibility. These provide greater incentives for owners and business leaders to encourage employees to discuss the reflexive nature of legal and moral responsibility in business, facilitate workers to voice their moral concerns, and create structures and processes that allow those concerns to be heard.

show abstract

Section: Trends In Legal Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward an Intermediate Position on Corporate Moral Personhood

Gibson

2011

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately for Ford and the driving public, Ford underestimated the prevalence of the crashes and the size of the civil judgments against it. In actuality, it would have been cheaper to fix the cars before they rolled out onto the nation's streets (Becker et al, 2002).…”

Section: The Maximizer: Contemporary Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Maximizer: Clarifying Merton's theories of anomie and strain

Murphy

Robinson

2008

Theoretical Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robert Merton's (1957) theories of anomie and strain are among the most widely examined theories of criminality. Messner and Rosenfeld's (1994) theory of institutional anomie built on Merton's conception of anomie, delineating how specific institutions lead to conditions of anomie and criminality. Cloward and Ohlin's (1961) theory of differential opportunity built upon Merton's strain theory, underscoring the fact that those involved in illegitimate means of opportunity require a set of learned skills as do those involved in legitimate means. In this tradition, the present paper further expands Merton's theories of anomie and strain, suggesting that Merton's categories of conformist and innovator are not mutually exclusive. In fact, some individuals combine both legitimate and illegitimate means of opportunity in pursuit of the American Dream. The Maximizer, the authors suggest, merges elements of both the conformist and the innovator (i.e. legitimate and illegitimate means). The present paper explores the justification for merging legitimate and illegitimate means of opportunity in pursuit of the American Dream.

show abstract

Utilizing the Autopsy for Quality Improvement

Sanchez

Chamberlin

2018

Autopsy in the 21st Century

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State of Indiana V. Ford Motor Company revisited

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

Toward an Intermediate Position on Corporate Moral Personhood

Toward an Intermediate Position on Corporate Moral Personhood

The Maximizer: Clarifying Merton's theories of anomie and strain

Utilizing the Autopsy for Quality Improvement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About