Do Business Leaders Have Role‐Model Obligations to Be Good Political Actors?

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12056
• Author: Earl Spurgin
• Date: 01 June 2015
• Published date: 01 June 2015

Do Business Leaders Have

Role-Model Obligations to Be

Good Political Actors?

EARL SPURGIN

ABSTRACT

This article raises an issue about corporate political

activity that is different from those typically addressed by

business ethicists. It examines the role-model status and

obligations of the business leaders who direct such activ-

ity. This approach has two potential benefits. First, since

ethicists often appeal to role-model obligations and many

are concerned about corporate political activity, business

ethics literature would benefit from expanding the exami-

nation of role-model status and obligations to encompass

the business leaders who direct political activity. Second,

it will help ethicists determine what we should demand

from business leaders who direct such activity. This is

important given the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens

United decision in 2010 that guarantees corporations the

free-speech right to make political expenditures in

support of political causes. I seek to demonstrate that we

should hold business leaders morally accountable for

how they direct political activity because of their role-

model status that arises from their greater fame, author-

ity, or power than ordinary persons possess.

Earl Spurgin is a Professor of Philosophy at the Department of Philosophy, John Carroll

University, University Heights, OH. E-mail: espurgin@jcu.edu.

bs_bs_banner

Business and Society Review 120:2 277–301

© 2015 Center for Business Ethics at Bentley University. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.,

350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA, and 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK.

INTRODUCTION

Corporations often engage in various forms of political activ-

ity. Similarly to individuals, through lobbying, campaign

contributions, and private and public appeals, they

attempt to influence the outcomes of elections, the shape of legisla-

tion, and the extent of regulations. Several business ethicists have

devoted considerable attention to the moral status of such activity.1

Some argue that corporations have the right to engage in political

activity, some argue that they have that right though it is less

extensive than is the corresponding right of individuals, and some

argue that they do not have that right at all. The arguments

typically concern the agency of corporations, whether corporations

have a right to free speech that entitles them to engage in the

political arena similarly to individuals, and the social conse-

quences of corporations’ political activity. Other business ethicists

have focused on the possibility of corporate citizenship, and, if it is

possible, what it entails. Some argue that corporations can be, and

should be, good political citizens, while others argue that political

citizenship is inconsistent with the role of corporations, or, for a

variety of reasons, society would be better served if we do not

demand that they be good political citizens.

Those issues, as well as others that business ethicists address

concerning corporate political activity, are important and worthy

of the ongoing attention paid to them. I, however, raise a new and

different issue about corporate political activity by examining the

role-model status and obligations of the business leaders who

direct it. This approach has two potential benefits. First, since

ethicists often appeal to role-model obligations and many are

concerned about corporate political activity, business ethics lit-

erature would benefit from expanding its examination of role-

model status and obligations to encompass the business leaders

who direct political activity. Second, since the U.S. Supreme

Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision in

2010 guarantees that corporate political activity will remain

ensconced in our political system for the foreseeable future, ethi-

cists should help determine what we can, and should, demand

from business leaders who direct such activity. The Court ruled

that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants corpo-

rations, labor unions, and other associations the free-speech right

278 BUSINESS AND SOCIETY REVIEW