Search

In this article, we conceptualize the under investigated and under theorized relationship between intimate partner violence (IPV) and business responsibility. As an urgent social issue, IPV—understood as abuse of power within the context of an intimate partner relationship, mainly perpetrated by men and involving a pattern of behavior—has been studied for decades in many disciplines. A less common yet vital research perspective is to examine IPV as it relates to the business and to ask how organizations should engage with IPV. In response to this question, we contribute a framework drawing from two distinctions in the business responsibility scholarship: the assumed role of the organization (responsibility to the firm/market; responsibility to the broader socio-political-economic environment); and the second focused on the approach to conceptualizing ethics (justice/fairness; ethics of care). Thus, we explicate four approaches to business responsibility and IPV, which serve the purposes of mapping three selected contributions, identifying limitations of these approaches, and opening up future research opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses articles in the issue on topics including business ethics; masculinity; and business–society relations.

We explore academic literature on business ethics education and critically compare the themes emerging from different contexts. Outlining guidelines for analysis based on Southern Theory, we conduct a content analysis on a selection of English, peer-reviewed articles and then critically compare emergent themes from across the ‘Northern'–Southern’ divide. The results suggest commonality but also substantive nuances. One key difference concerns a concerted effort from the South to decipher daily business experiences in relation to prevalent business ethics frameworks focused on the North. Furthermore, using notion of phronetic science, we critically discuss our findings to highlight inherent dynamics of control and resistance. The paper concludes by suggesting future directions for business ethics curriculum development that is more sensitive to these dynamics and by suggesting an adoption of notions related to practical wisdom. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]