LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Nordberg, Donald (2014)
Languages: English
Types: Unknown
Subjects:
Attempts to determine what constitutes “good” corporate governance have become mired in the quicksand of the ethical conflict between duty and utility, virtue and rights, as well as the fight over for whose good the organization exists. This paper takes a different tack. Drawing upon evidence from the efforts to build and develop the UK code of corporate governance, it argues that the nature of “good” is intractable, but that in the practical world a philosophically pragmatic approach applies, exemplified in the preference for a comply-or-explain approach rather than more formal modes of regulation. Using Toulmin’s (2001) of advocacy the reasonable, in opposition to the rational, it argues that “reasonably good” governance is the best that can be expected, given the contingent nature of organizational life and strategies and the uncertain and potentially fungible benefits of various mechanisms of corporate governance.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Aguilera, R. V., & Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2009). Codes of Good Governance. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 376-387.
    • Ashby, W. R. (1958). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. Cybernetica, 1(2), 83-99.
    • Ashby, W. R. (1968/2011). Variety, constraint, and the law of requisite variety. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 13(1-2), 190-207.
    • Cadbury, A. (1992). The Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. Retrieved April 9, 2007, from http://www.ecgi.org/codes/documents/cadbury.pdf
    • Czarniawska, B., & Joerges, B. (1996). The travel of ideas. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevon (Eds.), Translating Organizational Change (pp. 13-48). Berlin: de Gruyter.
    • Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a Stewardship Theory of Management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20-47.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article