Google in China
Ó Springer 2008
Journal of Business Ethics (2009) 86:143–157
DOI 10.1007/s10551-008-9840-y
Google in China: A Manager-Friendly
Heuristic Model for Resolving
Cross-Cultural Ethical Conflicts
ABSTRACT. Management practitioners and scholars have worked diligently to identify methods for ethical decision making in international contexts. Theoretical frameworks such as Integrative Social Contracts Theory
(Donaldson and Dunfee, 1994, Academy of Management
Review 19, 252–284) and more recently the Global
Business Citizenship Approach [Wood et al., 2006,
Global Business Citizenship: A Transformative Framework for
Ethics and Sustainable Capitalism. (M. E. Sharpe, Armonk,
NY)] have produced innovations in practice. Despite these advances, many managers have difficulty implementing these theoretical concepts in daily practice.
Using the example of recent decisions by internet service providers Google, Yahoo, and MSN regarding censorship requirements in China, we offer six heuristic questions to help managers to resolve cross-cultural ethical conflicts in which the firm’s way of doing business differs from the practice in the host country. Recognizing that companies can take different approaches to law and ethics (Paine,
1994, Harvard Business Review 72(2), 107–117), our aim is to provide a management decision process to deal with demands or opportunities for engaging in questionable business practices in a host country.
KEY WORDS: cross-cultural ethics, China, decision tree, international questionable practices, Google
Introduction
Despite a greater uniformity in business practices resulting from globalization, many Multinational
Enterprises (hereafter ‘‘MNEs’’) face cross-cultural ethical conflicts in which the firm’s business practices differ from the host country’s practices (e.g.,
DeGeorge, 2005; Hamilton and Knouse, 2001).
Increased pressure for transparency and a growing intolerance for corporate malfeasance have raised the
J.
Journal of Business Ethics (2009) 86:143–157
DOI 10.1007/s10551-008-9840-y
Google in China: A Manager-Friendly
Heuristic Model for Resolving
Cross-Cultural Ethical Conflicts
ABSTRACT. Management practitioners and scholars have worked diligently to identify methods for ethical decision making in international contexts. Theoretical frameworks such as Integrative Social Contracts Theory
(Donaldson and Dunfee, 1994, Academy of Management
Review 19, 252–284) and more recently the Global
Business Citizenship Approach [Wood et al., 2006,
Global Business Citizenship: A Transformative Framework for
Ethics and Sustainable Capitalism. (M. E. Sharpe, Armonk,
NY)] have produced innovations in practice. Despite these advances, many managers have difficulty implementing these theoretical concepts in daily practice.
Using the example of recent decisions by internet service providers Google, Yahoo, and MSN regarding censorship requirements in China, we offer six heuristic questions to help managers to resolve cross-cultural ethical conflicts in which the firm’s way of doing business differs from the practice in the host country. Recognizing that companies can take different approaches to law and ethics (Paine,
1994, Harvard Business Review 72(2), 107–117), our aim is to provide a management decision process to deal with demands or opportunities for engaging in questionable business practices in a host country.
KEY WORDS: cross-cultural ethics, China, decision tree, international questionable practices, Google
Introduction
Despite a greater uniformity in business practices resulting from globalization, many Multinational
Enterprises (hereafter ‘‘MNEs’’) face cross-cultural ethical conflicts in which the firm’s business practices differ from the host country’s practices (e.g.,
DeGeorge, 2005; Hamilton and Knouse, 2001).
Increased pressure for transparency and a growing intolerance for corporate malfeasance have raised the
J.
References: Dudley, B.: 2007, ‘Great Perks: Google’, Seattle Times, June 11, 2007, C1&4. ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 982170061), January, 2006. Internet’, April 29, 379(8475), p. 28.