IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v31y2021i3p421-449_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Duties of Beneficence Should Agents Discharge on Behalf of Principals? A Reflection through Shareholder Primacy

Author

Listed:
  • Mejia, Santiago

Abstract

Scholars who favor shareholder primacy usually claim either that managers should not fulfill corporate duties of beneficence or that, if they are required to fulfill them, they do so by going against their obligations to shareholders. Distinguishing between structurally different types of duties of beneficence and recognizing the full force of the normative demands imposed on managers reveal that this view needs to be qualified. Although it is correct to think that managers, when acting on behalf of shareholders, are not required to fulfill wide duties of charity, they are nevertheless required to fulfill a variety of narrow duties of beneficence. What is more, the obligation to fulfill these duties arises precisely because they are acting on behalf of shareholders. As such, this article 1) refines our understanding of the duties of corporate beneficence and 2) helps to identify which duties of beneficence are imposed on managers when they are acting on behalf of shareholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Mejia, Santiago, 2021. "Which Duties of Beneficence Should Agents Discharge on Behalf of Principals? A Reflection through Shareholder Primacy," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 421-449, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:31:y:2021:i:3:p:421-449_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X20000287/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Donaldson, 2023. "Value creation and CSR," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(6), pages 1255-1275, August.
    2. Theodore M. Lechterman & Ryan Jenkins & Bradley J. Strawser, 2024. "#StopHateForProfit and the Ethics of Boycotting by Corporations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 77-91, April.
    3. Gastón Reyes, 2023. "The All-Stakeholders-Considered Case for Corporate Beneficence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 37-55, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:31:y:2021:i:3:p:421-449_4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.