Enderle (2010) sets out to compare definitions in business ethics, based on the premise that standardization of terminology is lacking in the field. He focuses on three important recent publications for these definitions: The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics (Brenkert and Beauchamp 2010), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Crane, McWilliams, Matten, Moon, and Siegel 2008), and the Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society (Kolb 2008).

In each of the three sources, Enderle attacks the heavily Western and American bias on the editorial boards. Beyond this, Enderle's main discussion is on the definitions for field of "business ethics" and "corporate social responsibility (CSR)." In the case of Brenkert and Beauchamp's definition, Enderle characterizes it as focusing too narrowly on internal an external factors that are primarily from a business insider's perspective, ignoring the broader social science perspective. In similar fashion, Crane et al.'s handbook fall short in identifying individual ethics and delineating responsibility (e.g. the who, to whom, and for what) in the definition of CSR. Enderle gives Kolb's work the nod for most comprehensive; yet, still this has shortcomings in addressing individual ethics and it remains silent on religion.

Based on my experience with business ethics, this attempt to define terminology by Enderle is a positive approach. He has started at the top with the definitions of business ethics, but this same sentiment should be carried on down to all definitions of moral terminology. Ethical arguments are often reduced to a difference of semantics rather than a dispute over the actual underlying issue. Arguments without definitions are fruitless. We must define and agree upon definitions before we can undergo an intelligent discussion--or more accurately, argument--about ethical concerns in business. Every conversation should start with a definition of the terms and Enderle has given us an admirable start to this by pointing out the lack of consensus on "business ethics" itself. 

Enderle summarizes his argument with the following statement: "The fields of business ethics and CSR/business and society need much more conceptual clarity and consistency" (p. 732). He further calls for more international representation on the handbook boards along with addressing religion. I completely concur. 

Kolb, R. W. (2008). Encyclopedia of business ethics and society. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.