The Ethics of Organizational Ethics

Rhodes, C

The Ethics of Organizational Ethics

Rhodes, C

Permalink

Publisher:: SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Organization Studies, 2023, 44, (3), pp. 497-514
Issue Date:: 2023-03-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	rhodes-2022-the-ethics-of-organizational-ethics.pdf	Published version	130.36 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Rhodes, C https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6571-2872
dc.date.accessioned	2024-03-10T21:40:43Z
dc.date.available	2024-03-10T21:40:43Z
dc.date.issued	2023-03-01
dc.identifier.citation	Organization Studies, 2023, 44, (3), pp. 497-514
dc.identifier.issn	0170-8406
dc.identifier.issn	1741-3044
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/176416
dc.description.abstract	This Perspectives article reviews research on organizational ethics presented in a select group of articles from Organization Studies, each of which draws inspiration, directly or indirectly, from the ethical philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. This work is commended for how it has wrestled the locus of ethicality away from organizational authority and instead examined ethics in relation to the actions and interactions of those subject to that authority. Collectively, these articles articulate organizational ethics as an affective, relational and embodied response to the needs of others. Such ethics motivates political engagement in resistance to oppression and domination meted out by organizational authority. Acknowledging the significance of this contribution, the present article examines how the research reviewed is remiss for its latent humanism and the attendant risk of assuming that the actions of individual ethical subjects are morally superior to organized forms of ethics. The source of this ethical privileging of individual subjects comes from a failure to distinguish between the practice of ethics in organizations and the originary ethics of ethics. Following Levinas, the latter is understood as the passive and pre-subjective call to responsibility for the other with whom one is organized and that precedes any concrete proposal for an organizational ethics. By acknowledging the ethics of ethics, we see that affective, interpersonal ethics and more formally organized ethics can both be translations of the ethics of ethics, each being necessarily imperfect. The tension between authoritative and interpersonal forms of ethics in organizations is not a problem for ethics, but rather a condition of the possibility of organizational ethics itself.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	Organization Studies
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1177/01708406221082055
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	1503 Business and Management
dc.subject.classification	Business & Management
dc.subject.classification	35 Commerce, management, tourism and services
dc.title	The Ethics of Organizational Ethics
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	44
utslib.for	1503 Business and Management
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Business
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2024-03-10T21:40:42Z
pubs.issue	3
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	44
utslib.citation.issue	3

Abstract:

This Perspectives article reviews research on organizational ethics presented in a select group of articles from Organization Studies, each of which draws inspiration, directly or indirectly, from the ethical philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. This work is commended for how it has wrestled the locus of ethicality away from organizational authority and instead examined ethics in relation to the actions and interactions of those subject to that authority. Collectively, these articles articulate organizational ethics as an affective, relational and embodied response to the needs of others. Such ethics motivates political engagement in resistance to oppression and domination meted out by organizational authority. Acknowledging the significance of this contribution, the present article examines how the research reviewed is remiss for its latent humanism and the attendant risk of assuming that the actions of individual ethical subjects are morally superior to organized forms of ethics. The source of this ethical privileging of individual subjects comes from a failure to distinguish between the practice of ethics in organizations and the originary ethics of ethics. Following Levinas, the latter is understood as the passive and pre-subjective call to responsibility for the other with whom one is organized and that precedes any concrete proposal for an organizational ethics. By acknowledging the ethics of ethics, we see that affective, interpersonal ethics and more formally organized ethics can both be translations of the ethics of ethics, each being necessarily imperfect. The tension between authoritative and interpersonal forms of ethics in organizations is not a problem for ethics, but rather a condition of the possibility of organizational ethics itself.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/176416