An Ethical Issue in Voluntary-Consensus-Standards Development: A Decision-Science View

Voluntary Consensus Standards are commerce-related documents developed by interested volunteers under due-process procedures which ensure that the concerns of all parties are fairly taken into account. Standards are beneficial to society because they promote commerce and lower the costs of and barri...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Marpet, Mark I. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Springer Science + Business Media B. V 1998
In: Journal of business ethics
Jahr: 1998, Band: 17, Heft: 15, Seiten: 1701-1716
weitere Schlagwörter:B Ethical Issue
B Primary Objective
B Systemic Error
B Economic Growth
B Competitive Advantage
Online Zugang: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 178561147X
003 DE-627
005 20220112043523.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220112s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1023/A:1006088006735  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)178561147X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP178561147X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Marpet, Mark I.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a An Ethical Issue in Voluntary-Consensus-Standards Development: A Decision-Science View 
264 1 |c 1998 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Voluntary Consensus Standards are commerce-related documents developed by interested volunteers under due-process procedures which ensure that the concerns of all parties are fairly taken into account. Standards are beneficial to society because they promote commerce and lower the costs of and barriers to doing business. Because of this, conformance to a standard can confer significant competitive advantage., Vigorous, democratic competition between ideas leads to a high- quality standard. Some participants in the standards-development process will, against the general interest, attempt to skew a standard to favor a specific product, service, or practice. In order prevent this sort of abuse, rules are written to prevent any common-interest block from overwhelming the general interest. Unfettered debate is fostered by having no rules defining volunteer-member misconduct, eliminating any possibility that a majority will improperly use such rules to silence a minority. This unfortunately permits the rare but not-hypothetical situation where those unscrupulous and determined, or those out of control, are able to engage in obstructionism and misconduct without any possibility of penalty., This paper will introduce voluntary-consensus standards and the standards-development process. It will explore the fundamental differences between due process as it applies to an individual involved in the standards-development process and the more general issue of due process for an individual in society. The paper will address the implications of differing thresholds for judging whether misconduct has occurred and how these differing thresholds shift the balance between opposing systemic errors. It will propose a solution which balances the interests of those involved in the standards-development process and furthers standard development's primary objective: benefiting commerce and society by producing standards of the highest quality. 
650 4 |a Ethical Issue 
650 4 |a Competitive Advantage 
650 4 |a Primary Objective 
650 4 |a Systemic Error 
650 4 |a Economic Growth 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of business ethics  |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1982  |g 17(1998), 15, Seite 1701-1716  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)270937129  |w (DE-600)1478688-6  |w (DE-576)121465284  |x 1573-0697  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:17  |g year:1998  |g number:15  |g pages:1701-1716 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/25074007  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006088006735  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 17  |j 1998  |e 15  |h 1701-1716 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4033670343 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 178561147X 
LOK |0 005 20220112043523 
LOK |0 008 220112||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-31#6BBABC6EE34C35FB25367C98E0657D6BF1F4EE0B 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/25074007 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw