The review of corporate governance reform literature in Chapter Two found that the personal ethics of directors seems to be very important for their task but little is known about the role of directors’ personal ethics in corporate governance. The review of business ethics in this Chapter exposed several gaps.
The field of business ethics is fraught with disunity. Philosophical and descriptive business ethics streams seem irreconcilable for some, while others claim it is crucial for business ethics to be grounded in philosophy for the field to reach maturity (Alzola, 2011; Byrne, 2002). Is moral philosophy relevant to the lived experience of ethics? It must be if the business community operates on the
assumption that there are objective standards (Alzola, 2011). Is it possible to show they are interdependent? Furthermore little is known about the subjective ethical experience (Brand, 2008; Crane, 1999). The descriptive ethics stream has mainly focussed on the antecedents and consequences of ethical behaviour, neglecting the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of ethical perceptions. How do individuals understand ethics, how do they practise it, why and how do they have this understanding and how does it translate into practice? Moral philosophy is characterised by fragmentation (MacIntyre, 1984); a multitude of theories vying for acceptance thereby providing
92
scant guidance to practitioners and students (McDonald, 2010; Robin, 2009). It also seems to be imbued with a conviction that act-centred theories adequately explain the ethical experience even though some scholars argue that the
consideration of character and virtue could be greatly beneficial for the credibility of these theories (Hartman & Beck-Dudley, 1999). Can moral philosophy provide the clarity expected and needed by society which operates on the basis of
objective standards? Can rules, consequences and character engage in cooperation rather than competition? Does AVT have anything to contribute to the practise of business ethics? These are some of the areas that are under-researched in the literature.
This thesis has four aims, to:
-explore the role of ethics in corporate governance; whether directors understand ethics to be integral to their task or of relevance in specific situations and
moments; whether there is a role for their personal ethics; whether this reflects an Aristotelian perspective. (From Chapter Two)
-explore how directors understand and practise ethics; whether their personal ethics inform their task; whether their understanding reflects theories from moral philosophy such as Kantian ethics, utilitarianism or AVT
-explore the relationship between philosophical and descriptive ethics; could this be better articulated by exploring the lived experience of ethics?
-explore the potential role of AVT in informing corporate governance; is it relevant for corporate governance practice?
This thesis makes a contribution to both Corporate Governance and Ethics. The review of the corporate governance reform literature found that more studies were needed to find out what boards do in order to better focus reform action; moreover some argued that more attention needed to be given to the personal ethics of directors. Accordingly one aim of the thesis was to explore the role of directors’ ethics in their task of governing. At the same time the business ethics literature was in need of research to explore ethics in practice but from the perspective of
93
the actor. This gap was also met by this project. While finding out about directors’ experience of ethics in corporate governance, this also provided the occasion to explore unanswered questions posed by the business ethics literature.
3.6 Conclusion
This Chapter has presented an overview of the business ethics literature. The major divisions of descriptive and philosophical ethics were described and issues confronting the field noted. The area of philosophical ethics was then expounded in more detail. The best known traditions of Kantian ethics and utilitarianism were outlined and then compared and contrasted with AVT. This was followed by a detailed overview of the main features of AVT. This section sought to show that AVT deals with aspects of the lived experience of ethics which Kantian ethics and utilitarianism do not address so that AVT should be considered more as a
complement rather than an alternative; contributing to a more complete
understanding of the ethical experience. It was noted how codes of ethics were a key component of corporate governance regimes and literature advocating the importance of character for the effectiveness of codes was provided; then the work of two authors who argue that corporate governance is praxis in the
Aristotelian sense was briefly discussed. Then literature advocating the potential benefits of virtue and character for business was outlined. The chapter also included a critique of all three ethical traditions. Ultimately several under researched areas crystallised: the appropriate relationship between philosophical and descriptive branches of ethics; the empirical exploration of the ethical experience; and the relative relationship between the main theories within the branch of philosophical ethics.
95
Chapter Four - Methodology
4.0 Introduction
Chapters Two and Three have provided a review of the literature of corporate governance reform and business ethics respectively revealing a number of gaps in need of exploration. It was demonstrated how directors understand the role of ethics in corporate governance practice, how they understand and practise ethics, the relevance of moral philosophy and AVT in particular were relatively
unchartered waters. It seemed appropriate to the researcher that she needed to explore directors’ lived experience of ethics in their task of corporate governance in order to gain knowledge about these areas. This chapter outlines the
methodological choices which guided this study such as choosing: a qualitative over a quantitative approach; interpretivism as opposed to critical realism; interpretative rather than descriptive phenomenology; and semi-structured interviews as opposed to surveys or narratives.