Society for Business Ethics 2024 Annual Meeting

Paper Abstracts: Session 1

Session 1A: AI Ethics

• Algorithmic Price Discrimination For Social Good
  • As big data and machine learning give companies new powers to make inferences about a consumer’s willingness to pay, algorithmic price discrimination is becoming more common. Despite the popular backlash against these business practices, this paper presents a Rawlsian argument in support of first-degree price discrimination under certain conditions. The conditions are: (1) nobody pays more for the same goods than they would otherwise pay under a classical economic model (without price discrimination), (2) those who pay less are charged less because of their lower ability and opportunity to pay, rather than different desires or preferences. This argument also applies to labor pricing (wages). Implementing this pricing model requires companies to demonstrate the effects of their dynamic pricing model against a “blind” pricing model. This approach will be applied to two case studies: the pricing systems developed by Uber and Shipt.
• AI Sapiens: Exploring Wisdom In Artificial Intelligence 
  • The field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has evolved from the goal of replicating human intelligence (strong AI) to a focus on specialized task-oriented systems (weak AI). Recent advancements raise both concerns and hopes regarding genuine AI realization. Scholarly discourse emphasizes that for AI to emulate human decision-making authentically, it must not merely simulate intelligence but also embody wisdom. In particular, the consensus emphasizes wisdom’s critical role in AI development, while divergent views exist on its feasibility, with debates ranging from attainability to scepticism and claims of current AI manifestations of wisdom. Defining wisdom in the AI context proves challenging, leading to conceptual confusion among scholars. The present study contributes by analyzing the significance of wise AI, extending discussions beyond Artificial Narrow Intelligence (ANI) to consider implications for prospective Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Superintelligence (ASI). It adopts a virtue ethics approach, defining practical wisdom as a virtue characterized by four distinct attributes: good deliberation (euboulia), good comprehension (eusunesia), sympathetic consideration (sungnômê), and the ability to intuitively grasp principles (nous). The research evaluates current AI technologies against these wisdom characteristics, identifying replicated and unattained aspects. This analysis contributes to the evolving understanding of wisdom’s role in advancing AI technologies.
• Allocating Power Through AI Decision-Making: The Ethics Of Care Approach
  • The introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to accelerate and automate decision-making has strained the standard ethical approaches to understand the ethical issues around business, work, and employment. Unique attributes of AI and AI research – reinforcing power dynamics while further marginalizing vulnerable stakeholders; surreptitious yet pervasive data collection, – directly create ethical issues regarding the dispersal of power and control in society. We argue that questions of power and control, particularly in regard to terms of work and business decision-making, can be better addressed through an ethics of care approach that raises the voice of marginalized stakeholders by prioritizing the relationships between actors and their unique vulnerabilities and circumstances. The goal of this article is to critically examine AI and its ethical implications in terms of work and business, with a focus on the harmful exercises of power and marginalized groups. We will identify key ethical issues related to vulnerable stakeholders and the use of AI and propose the ethics of care as an ethical framework to approach these issues.

Session 1B: Stakeholder Decision Making

• Stakeholder Strategy In Practice: Understanding The Situational & Behavioral Dynamics Of Managerial Decision-Making
  • The stakeholder management literature yields two different approaches for dealing with decision scenarios: (1) Prioritizing specific stakeholders and their interests over others, often based on the different levels of cognitive salience attached to each stakeholder’s claim (Mitchell, Agle & Wood, 1997); (2) Finding ways to integrate (seemingly conflicting) stakeholder interests such that trade-offs are avoided (Freeman, 2010). These sub-literatures are essentially two self-contained theoretical perspectives—each with its internal logic and assumptions—that offer contrasting viewpoints on the crucially important topics of corporate governance and managerial responsibility. This paper aims to draw attention to the lived experience of managers in practice: stakeholder management is more complex than following either an integration or a prioritization approach, and thus there is a need for theory to address both the situational and behavioral (psychological) factors that incline managers towards either prioritization or integration in each decision scenario. Since managerial decisions have a direct and profound impact on stakeholder relationships, trust and engagement, comprehending these dynamics is vital for devising more effective stakeholder management strategies. By delving into the interplay between objective pressures and factors that are specific to the individual manager, we develop a model that predicts which stakeholder strategy will be followed in a given scenario.
• Multi-Rational Competence For Responsible Leadership: Enabling Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration
  • Addressing the grand societal challenges of our time requires innovative, collaborative solutions involving diverse stakeholders. However, multi-stakeholder collaborations face the challenge of multi-rationality: while constructive collaboration is essential for solving complex problems, tensions, ambiguities, and conflicts between stakeholders complicate the process. However, a research gap exists regarding the necessary mindset shifts and competencies needed for constructive collaboration in a responsible way. As responsible leadership research has recently entered a quest toward a competence model for responsible leadership, we contribute one vital element: multi-rational competence. This competence is the mindset and ability to act, enabling responsible leaders to navigate complex challenges by constructively engaging with diverse stakeholders and fostering a collaborative environment. Our work introduces multi-rational competence and presents a process model illustrating its effects in responsible leadership within multi-stakeholder contexts. This model shows how multi-rational competence forms the foundation for constructive collaboration in multi-stakeholder settings, aiding in tackling grand challenges. Our research aims to guide leaders, inspire educational initiatives, and support future investigations.
• Bittersweet Symphony: Value Creation Through Dissonance In Stakeholder Management
  • This paper addresses the challenge of effectively engaging traditionally marginalized, non-supportive stakeholders. We contribute to stakeholder management by moving beyond common recommendations of forced alignment and disengagement, highlighting the legitimacy and value creation potential of such stakeholders. Using the music theory principles of consonant and dissonant harmony, we propose a framework that conceptualizes stakeholder interests as musical notes in a composition, providing a fresh perspective that goes beyond binary states. By acknowledging and integrating dissonant voices, this paper advocates for a more inclusive and dynamic approach to managing stakeholder relationships. This paper also offers practical insights and strategies for managers, providing a toolbox derived from music theory. Through the use of case studies that span diverse industries, this paper illustrates how our consonance-dissonance framework can transform seemingly unresolvable stakeholder relationships into sources of innovation, competitive advantage, and sustainable growth.

Session 1C: Emerging Scholars 1

• Empowering LGBTQ+ Employees: How Social Support And Authenticity Shape Innovativeness And Proactiveness
• Minority Status As A Burden? Demographic Minority CEOs, External Pressures, And Contested Diversity Policy
• Identifying And Addressing Digital Employment Discrimination
• The Impact Of ESG-Linked Compensation On Executives’ ESG Awareness

Session 1D: Ethical Leadership

• Implicit Theories Of Ethical And Unethical Leadership: The Development And Validation Of A Measurement Instrument
  • This study explores Implicit Theories of Ethical and Unethical Leadership (ITEUL), defined as followers’ conceptions, images, and beliefs of Ethical and Unethical Leadership. Drawing on research of Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs), I aim to identify and understand ITEUL, examine their structure and content, investigate the relationship between ethical and unethical leader prototypes, and review the relationship between ILTs and ITEUL. I develop an instrument to measure ITEUL using four different studies and samples comprising 762 participants. The findings lead to a bi-factor model representing ITEUL that includes two opposing dimensions – ethical and unethical Implicit Leadership Theories – and a general factor, Implicit Theories of Ethical and Unethical Leadership, that represents the measure’s main construct. I further find that individuals have either an ethical or and unethical leader prototype. Scholarly and practical implications of these results are discussed and possible avenues for future research are highlighted.
• Self-Awareness In Leadership Theory: With And Without Dignity
  • Recent debates engaged with scandals and negative outcomes of management behaviors and asked how we can improve management education to develop more responsible leaders. In this essay, we reflect on the self-awareness concept that has gained importance in recent leadership debates and argue for a more comprehensive concept of Selbstbewusstsein. Knowing oneself has been a foundational topic in philosophy for centuries and G.F.W. Hegel in the early 19th century demonstrated the pitfalls arising from the desire for recognition and respect. We review and build on his work to show what role the human characteristic of self-awareness plays in psychology-driven concepts. We contrast this with a more comprehensive conception of human self-awareness, Selbstbewusstsein. We problematize self-aware leaders who can control themselves, situations, and others, and we argue that some negative leadership behaviors result from considering the use of power and control as a way to achieve self-awareness. Adopting a broad view of Selbstbewusstsein allows us to build an understanding of leadership that avoids today’s negative outcomes. The contribution of this pointed conceptual essay is threefold. First, we make visible the human anthropology of current mainstream leadership theory by looking at the very current topic self-awareness. Second, we show that the polar opposite human anthropology of recognizing and being recognized has a long tradition in philosophy. Third, we argue that embracing the friction between these two views of humanity might get us one step closer to the ‘better’ leadership theory and practice for which Sumantra Ghoshal called twenty years ago.
• When Should Leaders Be Confident In Themselves?
  • Self-confidence is a cornerstone for flourishing in business. It is strange, then, that we see little discussion of the concept. Discussions of positive self-evaluations are negative. Business ethicists and management scholars alike worry about narcissistic (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007), hubristic (De Bruin, 2013) and excessively self-interested leaders. Yet, in practice, leaders are worried when they come up short on confidence. Women leaders, especially, maintain a lower degree of self-confidence than men (Blalock, 2013; Gallo, 2011; Kay & Shipman, 2014; Lenney, 1977; Paustian-Underdahl et al., 2014; Sandberg & Scovell, 2013; Shellenberger, 2018). In this essay, I show that concerning leadership ethics, thinkers have focused on the vice of excess—chaunos, thinking oneself worthy of great things when one is not—what today might be referred to as narcissism, arrogance or Machiavellianism. We have not seen much ethical discussion on the vice of deficiency—mikropsychos, thinking oneself worthy of less than one is really worthy of—which I argue the empirical research finds women as more likely prone towards. I draw on Aristotle’s virtue of megalopsychia to argue that leader self-confidence requires rationally evaluating a combination of two determinants. Megalopsychia is the virtue of thinking oneself “worthy of great things” and being “worthy of them” (NE, 2014: 1123b2-3; Curzer, 1990, 1991). According to Kristjansson (1998a, 1998b), the first condition requires self-knowledge (I’ll call this “internal knowledge”). The second condition requires the megalopsychos to have greatness in the virtues, which makes megalopsychia something like a higher-order moral and epistemic virtue.

Session 1E: Panel 1

• Peace And The Firm: Insights From Political Science And Business Scholarship