Abstract

Integrative social contracts theory (ISCT) uses empirical methods to develop guidelines for international business ethics. This article criticizes ISCT in terms of the way people actually think about contracts and agreements around the globe. Differences in orientations to communications context, moral reasoning, and institutional and structural conditions make the identification of authentic norms, hypernorms, and relevant communities problematic. The difficulties of the empirical methods suggest recourse to more traditional theoretical approaches for the identification of hypernorms as well as a stronger test for the compatibility of authentic norms with hypernorms.