Objections to an objectivist approach to integrity

Article Abstract:

This article challenges Becker's objectivist account of integrity in organizations. Although existing approaches to workplace integrity are flawed by conceptual and methodological inconsistencies, an objectivist analysis is unable to resolve these problems and raises new concerns. We develop three lines of argument. First, we critique objectivism as a philosophical system of questionable legitimacy and coherence. Second, we argue that the fundamental objectivist principle of rational egoism is inferior to existing theories of business ethics as a means of defining moral behavior in organizations. Third, we contend that the objectivist account of integrity understates the role of social power as a determinant of organizational choices and outcomes. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

---

Integrity in organizations: beyond honesty and conscientiousness

Article Abstract:

In previous literature on employee selection, leadership, and organizational trust, scholars have identified integrity as a central aspect of work behavior. However, despite important contributions, their work often has confused integrity with other concepts (especially honest and conscientiousness) and has treated integrity as either a morally neutral or relativistic phenomenon. The philosophy of "Objectivism" solves these problems by providing a definition of integrity that distinguishes the term from related concepts and by integrating integrity into an objective code of morality. I discuss the implications of this perspective for the study of integrity in organizations. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

---

Rebuttal to a subjectivist critique of an objectivist approach to integrity in organizations

Article Abstract:

In their critique of Becker's article on integrity in organizations, Barry and Stephens argue that the Objectivist approach is illegitimate, inferior to subjectivist perspectives of business ethics, and unmindful of the role of social power in organizations. We response to these criticisms by demonstrating that Barry and Stephens' critique rests upon the fallacious argument from authority, a misunderstanding of altruism and egoism, and a failure to distinguish between economic and social power. In so doing, we explain why the Objectivist perspective is valid and why it is superior to subjective, relativistic misconceptions of integrity. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: At the margins: a distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups
• Abstracts: Teaching the world to take notice. Lotus expects applet to take bits out of Microsoft in small bites
• Abstracts: Perceptions of strategic priorities, consensus and firm performance. Tacit knowledge: some suggestions for operationalization
• Abstracts: Microsoft gives in to a Federal order on Internet browser. Microsoft browser case has day in court
• Abstracts: Eye catching: how new media are racing to become the mass media; in terms of the audience, size matters. But how big? And by whose measure?

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.