IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/mlucee/201904.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fighting corruption: How binding commitments of business firms can help to activate the self-regulating forces of competitive markets

Author

Listed:
  • Pies, Ingo
  • Hielscher, Stefan

Abstract

Corruption is a serious and complex challenge for modern societies. Fighting and preventing corruption thus requires constructive learning processes. In this paper, we systematically integrate a market ethics perspective with a business ethics perspective constitutive for the study of 'ordonomics'. In doing so, we argue that, first, companies have a(n) (common) interest in actively fighting corruption using collective forms of self-regulation and, second, we show what companies can do about it internally. We derive the first argument from a market ethics perspective that shows how companies suffer from a race to the bottom that results from corruption under market competition. The second argument is based on a business ethics perspective that shows how cartels of silence within companies can create significant obstacles for well-meaning top management to address the problem effectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan, 2019. "Fighting corruption: How binding commitments of business firms can help to activate the self-regulating forces of competitive markets," Discussion Papers 2019-04, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:mlucee:201904
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213280/1/1687008043.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingo Pies & Markus Beckmann & Stefan Hielscher, 2010. "Value Creation, Management Competencies, and Global Corporate Citizenship: An Ordonomic Approach to Business Ethics in the Age of Globalization," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 265-278, June.
    2. Sass, Peter & Pies, Ingo, 2005. "Selbstverpflichtung als Instrument der Korruptionsprävention bei Infrastrukturprojekten," Discussion Papers 2005-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    3. Johann Graf Lambsdorff, 2006. "Causes and Consequences of Corruption: What Do We Know from a Cross-Section of Countries?," Chapters, in: Susan Rose-Ackerman (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus & Pies, Ingo, 2014. "Participation versus Consent: Should Corporations Be Run according to Democratic Principles?1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 533-563, October.
    5. Lambsdorff, Johann Graf, 2002. "Making corrupt deals: contracting in the shadow of the law," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 221-241, July.
    6. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus, 2009. "Whistle-Blowing heißt nicht: "verpfeifen" - Ordonomische Überlegungen zur Korruptionsprävention durch und in Unternehmen," Discussion Papers 2009-19, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    7. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2009. "Moral Commitments and the Societal Role of Business: An Ordonomic Approach to Corporate Citizenship," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 375-401, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus, 2009. "Whistle-Blowing heißt nicht: "verpfeifen" - Ordonomische Überlegungen zur Korruptionsprävention durch und in Unternehmen," Discussion Papers 2009-19, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    2. Ingo Pies & Philipp Schreck & Karl Homann, 2021. "Single-objective versus multi-objective theories of the firm: using a constitutional perspective to resolve an old debate," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-811, April.
    3. Hielscher, Stefan & Winkin, Jan & Pies, Ingo, 2016. "NGO credibility as private or public good? A governance perspective on how to improve NGO advocacy in public discourse," Discussion Papers 2016-03, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    4. Will, Matthias Georg & Hielscher, Stefan, 2013. "How do companies invest in corporate social responsibility? An ordonomic contribution for empirical CSR research," Discussion Papers 2013-3, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    5. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    6. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2012. "The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic concept of corporate citizenship developed in comparison with the Aristoleian idea of individual citizenship," Discussion Papers 2012-1, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    7. Bosco, Bruno, 2016. "Old and new factors affecting corruption in Europe: Evidence from panel data," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 66-85.
    8. Matthias Georg Will & Stefan Hielscher, 2014. "How do Companies Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility? An Ordonomic Contribution for Empirical CSR Research," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-23, July.
    9. Suchanek Andreas, 2012. "Unternehmensverantwortung als Vermeidung relevanter Inkonsistenzen / Corporate Responsibility: The Avoidance of Relevant Inconsistencies," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 241-260, January.
    10. Markus Beckmann & Stefan Hielscher & Ingo Pies, 2014. "Commitment Strategies for Sustainability: How Business Firms Can Transform Trade‐Offs Into Win–Win Outcomes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 18-37, January.
    11. Vladislav Valentinov & Lioudmila Chatalova, 2016. "Institutional Economics, Social Dilemmas, and the Complexity-Sustainability Trade-off (A response to Hielscher and Pies)," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 488-491, May.
    12. Will, Matthias Georg & Hielscher, Stefan, 2012. "How do companies invest in corporate social responsibility? An ordonomic contribution for empirical CSR research," Discussion Papers 2012-2, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    13. Stefan Hielscher & Bryan W. Husted, 2020. "Proto-CSR Before the Industrial Revolution: Institutional Experimentation by Medieval Miners’ Guilds," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 253-269, October.
    14. Pies, Ingo, 2011. "Regelkonsens statt Wertekonsens: Die Grundidee des politischen Liberalismus," Discussion Papers 2011-20, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    15. Will, Matthias Georg, 2012. "Change Management und Interaktionspotentiale: Wie Rationalfallen den organisatorischen Wandel blockieren," Discussion Papers 2012-9, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    16. Pies, Ingo & Sass, Peter, 2011. "Wie sollte die Managementvergütung (nicht) reguliert werden? Ordnungspolitische Überlegungen zur Haftungsbeschränkung von und in Organisationen," Discussion Papers 2011-2, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    17. Pies, Ingo, 2011. "Karl Homanns Programm einer ökonomischen Ethik – "A View From Inside" in zehn Thesen," Discussion Papers 2011-1, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    18. Stefan Hielscher & Ingo Pies, 2016. "Emergent Social Dilemmas in Modern Society: An Institutional Economics Perspective (A comment on Valentinov and Chatalova)," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 483-487, May.
    19. Will, Matthias Georg, 2015. "Privacy and Big Data: The need for a multi-stakeholder approach for developing an appropriate privacy regulation in the age of Big Data," Discussion Papers 2015-3, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    20. Felix Carl Schultz & Robert Jaroslav Reinhardt, 2022. "Facilitating systemic eco‐innovation to pave the way for a circular economy: A qualitative‐empirical study on barriers and drivers in the European polyurethane industry," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(5), pages 1646-1675, October.

    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:zbw:mlucee:201904. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wwhalde.html .

    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.