Johan Wempe

“An ethics report is a snapshot of a process taking place at various levels within a company and between its stakeholders.” Ethics reports can serve a number of purposes, and for large multinational companies they can provide an important tool for stakeholder management, as is illustrated in the case of Shell. Muel Kaptein and Johan Wempe both work for KPMG Ethics & Integrity Consulting and lecture in business ethics at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Both are involved in the verification of the Shell Report.

In this article, we analyse whether it is possible to hold a loosely organised collective responsible for the effects it has on others. We consider the possibility of holding a loosely organised collective responsible by comparing it with a well-organised collective such as a corporation, a joint action (a collective lacking a formal organisation) and an aggregate. We explore the concept of responsibility of a loosely organised collective by analysing a concrete example: the responsibility of the major oil producers for climate change. We will argue that it is possible to apply the concept of responsibility to such loosely organised collectives. To understand this responsibility it is necessary to decouple the concept of responsibility from the concept of acting and to develop forward-looking (prospective) ethics. We will argue that individuals and organisations belonging to a loosely organised collective have a joint responsibility: to some extent, they are each other’s brother’s keeper.

“An ethics report is a snapshot of a process taking place at various levels within a company and between its stakeholders.” Ethics reports can serve a number of purposes, and for large multinational companies they can provide an important tool for stakeholder management, as is illustrated in the case of Shell. Muel Kaptein and Johan Wempe both work for KPMG Ethics & Integrity Consulting and lecture in business ethics at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Both are involved in the verification of the Shell Report.

Due to several recent scandals, Business Ethics is now firmly embraced. Whereas in the 1980s and early 1990s there were serious doubts expressed about combining ethics and business, the link now seems to have become self-evident. Fundamental questions about the tensions between business and ethics however continue to receive little attention. In this paper, based upon a debate concerning the Fair Trade company, the strains between business and ethics are analyzed. The article shows how several great thinkers have already considered this tension. Three ways to conceptualize the tension between business and ethics have been distinguished, and these are outlined in the paper. In one approach, ethical entrepreneurship, value tensions are perceived as a source for entrepreneurship. However, this approach presupposes pluralistic ethics. Thinking only in terms of black and white is seen as blocking the ability to adequately handle the tension between business and ethics. Opting for ‘‘ethical entrepreneurship’’, as by Fair Trade, has fundamental and important consequences for the company’s communication policy.

“An ethics report is a snapshot of a process taking place at various levels within a company and between its stakeholders.” Ethics reports can serve a number of purposes, and for large multinational companies they can provide an important tool for stakeholder management, as is illustrated in the case of Shell. Muel Kaptein and Johan Wempe both work for KPMG Ethics & Integrity Consulting and lecture in business ethics at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Both are involved in the verification of the Shell Report.

This article shows that business ethics is not capable of explaining the responsibility of limited organised collectives such as chains, sectors and industries. The responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry to make AIDS blockers available for patients in Africa is an example of such a sector responsibility. By using system theory, it is possible to understand responsibility at the level of a social system. The Integrative Social Contracts Theory has been extended to determine this system's responsibility

Following the example of the many organizations in the United States which have a code of ethics, an increasing interest on the part of companies, trade organizations, (semi-)governmental organizations and professions in the Netherlands to develop codes of ethics can be witnessed. We have been able to escort a variety of organizations in this process. The process that organizations must go through in order to attain a code involves a variety of difficult decisions. In this article we will, based on our experiences, describe twelve dilemmas which will have to be solved during the development of such a code. When one or more of these dilemmas is ignored or an ungrounded choice is made, the effectiveness of the code will be negatively affected. Furthermore, the twelve dilemmas could be used as twelve dimensions to exemplify organizational codes of ethics. In this article we will also discuss a method to organize ethics within the organization. This will serve as a guide as to how, with respect to the dilemmas described, adequate considerations can be made. The article will be concluded with a description of our experiences at the Dutch Schiphol Airport. This case demonstrates how the aforementioned reasoning can be applied in practice.