Bus Ethics Research Articles

A Rawlsian Rule for Corporate Governance

Business ethics can be regarded as a field dealing with corporate self-regulation as it relates to the treatment of stakeholders. However, a concern for corporate stakeholders need not take a corporate-centric perspective, as shown by recent efforts (especially Singer in Bus Ethics Q 25(1):65–92, 2015) to situate corporate conduct within Rawls’ political theory. Although Rawls was largely mute on the subject himself, his theory has implications for business ethics and corporate governance more specifically. Given an understanding of a “Rawlsian society” as a whole—where corporations as associations are a part—this paper addresses how a Rawlsian perspective would safeguard against corporate harms in society. We argue that a Rawlsian society would primarily regulate corporate conduct through exogenous constraints in the form of legislation. To the extent that business ethics is concerned with endogenous constraints in the form of corporate-centric self-regulation regarding stakeholders, to adopt a Rawlsian perspective is to assume instead a society-centric perspective and to impose exogenous constraints on corporate conduct in the form of legislation for the benefit of citizens. In the context of Rawls’ political liberalism, normative concerns in business are accounted for through legislation and the system of background justice. In a clear departure from Singer (Bus Ethics Q 25(1):65–92, 2015, Bus Ethics J Rev 6(3):11–17, 2018a), we further develop our argument to propose that Rawls' theory can be interpreted as providing a rule for corporate governance. The rule—which is imposed exogenously for the good of society—states: After choosing the corporate constraint mechanism (exogenous vs. endogenous) that best promotes the Liberty Principle, choose the corporate control regime (shareholder vs. stakeholder) that maximizes economic efficiency.

Business Versus Ethics? Thoughts on the Future of Business Ethics

To commemorate 40 years since the founding of the Journal of Business Ethics, the editors in chief of the journal have invited the editors to provide commentaries on the future of business ethics. This essay comprises a selection of commentaries aimed at creating dialogue around the theme Business versus Ethics? (inspired by the title of the commentary by Jeffrey Harrison). The authors of these commentaries seek to transcend the age-old separation fallacy (Freeman in Bus Ethics Q 4(4):409–421, 1994) that juxtaposes business and ethics/society, posing a forced choice or trade off. Providing a contemporary take on the classical question “if it’s legal is it ethical?”, David Hess explores the role of the law in promoting or hindering stakeholder-oriented purpose and governance structure. Jeffrey Harrison encourages scholars to move beyond the presupposition that businesses are either strategic or ethical and explore important questions at the intersection of strategy and ethics. The proposition that business models might be inherently ethical or inherently unethical in their design is developed by Sheila Killian, who examines business systems, their morality, and who they serve. However, the conundrum that entrepreneurs are either lauded for their self-belief and risk-taking, or loathed for their self-belief and risk-taking, is discussed by M. Tina Dacin and Julia Roloff using the metaphor of taboos and totems. These commentaries seek to explore positions that advocate multiplicity and tensions in which business ethics is not either/or but both.

Bringing Excitement to Empirical Business Ethics Research: Thoughts on the Future of Business Ethics

To commemorate 40 years since the founding of the Journal of Business Ethics, the editors-in-chief of the journal have invited the editors to provide commentaries on the future of business ethics. This essay comprises a selection of commentaries aimed at creating dialog around the theme Bringing Excitement to Empirical Business Ethics Research (inspired by the title of the commentary by Babalola and van Gils). These editors, considering the diversity of empirical approaches in business ethics, envisage a future in which quantitative business ethics research is more bold and innovative, as well as reflexive about its techniques, and dialog between quantitative and qualitative research nourishes the enrichment of both. In their commentary, Babalola and van Gils argue that leadership research has stagnated with the use of too narrow a range of perspectives and methods and too many overlapping concepts. They propose that novel insights could be achieved by investigating the lived experience of leadership (through interviews, document analysis, archival data); by focusing on topics of concern to society; by employing different personal, philosophical, or cultural perspectives; and by turning the lens on the heroic leader (through “dark-side” and follower studies). Taking a provocative stance, Bal and Garcia-Lorenzo argue that we need radical voices in current times to enable a better understanding of the psychology underlying ethical transformations. Psychology can support business ethics by not shying away from grander ideas, going beyond the margins of “unethical behaviors harming the organization” and expanding the range of lenses used to studying behavior in context. In the arena of finance and business ethics, Guedhami, Liang, and Shailer emphasize novel data sets and innovative methods. Significantly, they stress that an understanding the intersection of finance and ethics is central to business ethics; financial equality and inclusion are persistent socio-economic and political concerns that are not always framed as ethics issues, yet relevant business policies and practices manifest ethical values. Finally, Charles Cho offers his opinion on the blurry line between the “ethical” versus “social” or “critical” aspects of accounting papers. The Journal of Business Ethics provides fertile ground for innovative, even radical, approaches to quantitative methods (see Zyphur and Pierides in J Bus Ethics 143(1):1–16, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3549-8, 2017), as part of a broad goal of ethically reflecting on empirical research.

Leading by living – A personal journey towards values and goals-based leadership of self and others

Leading by living – A personal journey towards values and goals-based leadership of self and others

Navigating the Ethically Complex and Controversial World of College Athletics: A Humanistic Leadership Approach to Student Athlete Well-Being.

The college athletics environment within the USA is ethically complex and often controversial. From an academic standpoint, athletes are often viewed as a privileged class receiving undue benefit. Yet closer inspection reveals that student athletes are at risk psychologically, physically, and intellectually in ways that undermine development and flourishing. This reality stands in troubling contrast to the prosocial, virtue-based goals expressed by university mission statements. Given the role of sport in many university business models, college athletics invites scrutiny from a business ethics standpoint. Using a humanistic leadership perspective (Pirson in: Humanistic management: protecting dignity and promoting well-being, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017), we organize our analysis around three challenges facing the college athletics system: (1) navigating the tension between claiming college athletes are amateurs rather than professionals; (2) defining the ethical edge between winning and winning fairly; and (3) moderating the insatiable drive to win while protecting student athlete well-being. We then articulate three strategies for successfully addressing these challenges: leadership role modeling, putting structural supports in place and holding people accountable. We argue that humanistic leadership and a ‘balanced motivational drive mindset’ (Lawrence and Nohria in: J Bus Ethics 128:383–394, 2002, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2090-2; Pirson 2017) could help move college athletics from an economistic model toward a more humanistic model that prioritizes the dignity and well-being of its participants, particularly student athletes.

Business Model Involvement, Adaptive Capacity, and the Triple Bottom Line at the Base of the Pyramid

Almost two decades ago, Prahalad and Hammond [Harv Bus Rev, 80(9):48–59, 2002] introduced the base/bottom of the pyramid (BOP) approach to profitably serving the poor with business models adapted from developed markets while alleviating poverty. In response to disappointing results and ethical criticism, the BOP approach evolved from a just-for-profit approach with a passive role of the poor to an inclusive development approach that integrates the principles of the triple bottom line. A recent review of the BOP literature [Dembek et al., J Bus Ethics 165(3):365–382, 2020], however, reveals a lack of empirical evidence to support the sustainable BOP approach. In this paper, we specify the assumptions underlying the sustainable BOP approach and test them using structural equation modeling with clustered robust standard errors on a unique dataset of 212 firms. Our findings show that BOP business model involvement and adaptive capacity are significant drivers of the triple bottom line at the BOP; however, business model adaptive capacity does not guarantee an ecologically sustainable performance at the BOP. We find that there is a need for further extension of the ethical foundations of the sustainable BOP approach.

Human–Animal Relations in Business and Society: Advancing the Feminist Interpretation of Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder theory has largely been anthropocentric in its focus on human actors and interests, failing to recognise the impact of nonhumans in business and organisations. This leads to an incomplete understanding of organisational contexts that include key relationships with nonhuman animals. In addition, the limited scholarly attention paid to nonhumans as stakeholders has mostly been conceptual to date. Therefore, we develop a stakeholder theory with animals illustrated through two ethnographic case studies: an animal shelter and Nordic husky businesses. We focus our feminist reading of Driscoll and Starik’s (J Bus Ethics 49:55–73, 2004) stakeholder attributes for nonhumans and extend this to include affective salience built on embodied affectivity and knowledge, memories, action and care. Findings reveal that nonhuman animals are important actors in practice, affecting organisational operations through human–animal care relationships. In addition to confirming animals are stakeholders, we further contribute to stakeholder theory by offering ways to better listen to nontraditional actors.

CSR reporting by Chinese and Western MNEs: patterns combining formal homogenization and substantive differences

In light of the growing economic might and intensification of global activities of Chinese multinational enterprises (MNE), this paper looks into the nature of their corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting. CSR communications of the largest Chinese companies and their counterparts from advanced economies have been compared based on quantitative and qualitative content analysis of CSR reports. A mixed method approach has been rarely utilized in the analysis of CSR reporting. To analyze CSR reports the paper uses a two-dimensional conceptual framework based on Wood (Acad Manag Rev 16:691–717, 1991); Jamali and Mirshak (J Bus Ethics 72:243–262, 2007) and Lockett, Moon and Visser (J Manag Stud 43:115–136, 2006); Moon and Shen (J Bus Ethics 94:613–629, 2010). The findings indicate that quantitatively Chinese MNEs display patterns of CSR reporting comparable to major MNEs in developed economies. This paper argues that just like MNEs from developed economies Chinese MNEs use a global CSR reporting template as a convenient tool to align and harmonize various isomorphic pressures. However, qualitatively substantive discrepancies in content have been also identified due to national or other contextual characteristics. The analysis reveals a complex picture of national and international isomorphic forces at play. The paper addresses the lack of consensus concerning convergence/divergence of CSR reporting across the globe and, more specifically, between developed economies and emerging markets. In this respect this paper responds to the general call for research looking into various aspects of business operations, including CSR reporting, of MNEs from emerging markets.

Criticism of Triple Bottom Line: TBL (With Special Reference to Sustainability)

With the effects of inclusive economic predicament of 2008, the obstinate problems of importunate poverty and environmental change have focused the attention towards maintaining the sustainability by establishing balance in the triple bottom line (TBL). In this paper, we have tried to critically examine the philosophy of triple bottom line and it’s relevance in maintaining the sustainability. The process of maintaining sustainability in the TBL is undoubtedly facilitated by the citizenship behaviour of companies (Henriques et al. Routledge, London, 2013). Yet the triple bottom line philosophy is being accepted by different researchers because they consider TBL is one of the concepts evaluating and improving the sustainability. Critics are typically “slow to praise and quick to criticize” (Mish and Scammon, J Public Policy Market 29:12–26, 2010) with this the critics of TBL argue on its practicality and validity. One of the critical studies of TBL regarded it as intrinsically ambiguous because it is unable to convey its exact meaning (Norman and MacDonald, Bus Ethics Q 14:243–262, 2004). Triple Bottom Line a framework of sustainability to examine the social, environmental and economic impact of company was recalled by Elikington it's originator despite rapid growth in the area of sustainability extending up over one million dollar in a year as he realized that TBL was not meeting the purpose for which it was created. After comprehensive understanding and building upon the available literature, this paper criticizes TBL and reveals that this philosophy is not based on the real concept, nothing is new, unique and innovative in it. It only explains the already existing concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and a sustainability measurement tool.

On the Ethics of "Non-Corporate" Insider Trading.

The ethical considerations of insider trading have been widely debated in the academic literature (see e.g., Moore in J Bus Ethics 9(3):171–182, 1990). In 2013, the STOCK Act, which was initially passed to mitigate insider trading by government officials, was quickly and unexpectedly amended to allow certain government employees to withhold their financial information. To identify and quantify the potential costs placed on investors by non-corporate insider traders, we use the unusual circumstances surrounding this amendment. For a sample of stocks most held by members of Congress, we find that, relative to control stocks, liquidity significantly worsens and volatility increases during the post-amendment period. Our results highlight the costs that are incurred by investors in the presence of non-corporate insider trading. These findings call for a stronger development of an ethical framework that justifies the restriction of all types of insider trading.

Organizational Virtues and Organizational Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human features to non-human subjects. Anthropomorphized organizations acquire in the minds of their members a unique identity, which becomes capable of guiding members’ motivations, with important managerial implications. Ashforth et al. (Acad Manage Rev https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0496, 2018) offered a theoretical model of anthropomorphism in organizations, including “top-down” and “bottom-up” processes of organizational anthropomorphism as antecedents, and sensemaking and the sense of social connection of the organization as outcomes. Using SEM, this study operationalizes Ashforth et al.’s (Acad Manage Rev https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0496, 2018) model using a two-trait scale of organizational virtue (Empathy and Courage) derived from Chun (J Bus Ethics 57:269–284, 2005), including measures of CSR and OCB as antecedents, and organizational justice and affective commitment as outcomes. The model is tested on survey data from seven UK managed service organizations in the hotels, logistics and legal sectors. As secondary contribution, moderation analysis is undertaken by industry, offering further insight into the evaluation of organizational anthropomorphism. Firstly, we note that high evaluations of Empathy influence evaluations of Courage through a halo effect. Secondly, we note that heuristic evaluation of the firm’s CSR practice also influences perceptions of Empathy and Courage. The paper also includes a discussion of the critique of organizational virtues by virtue ethicists in an effort to advance the dialogue between the two traditions.

Extracting Legitimacy: An Analysis of Corporate Responses to Accusations of Human Rights Abuses

We ask what type of neutralization techniques corporations apply to allegations of human rights abuses. We proceed by undertaking a Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA) of 162 responses by ten extractives-sector firms over a period of 14 years. The firms were responding to accusations of human rights impacts documented by the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. We use Garrett et al.’s (J Bus Ethics 8(7):507–520, 1989) framework of neutralization techniques consisting of denial, justification, concession and excuse to examine the responses. During our QCA, we observed emerging themes around self-promotion and evasive tactics. We contribute to existing literature by proposing ‘evasion’ as a novel neutralization technique, particularly in circumstances of corporate responses to accusations of wrongdoing. We argue that evasion occurs when firms refuse to engage in the debate brought forward in an accusation. In addition, we enrich our understanding of neutralization techniques by proposing subneutralization techniques in our analysis to diverge from that of other studies. We conclude by discussing the implications of the predominance of corporate narcissism and evasive neutralization techniques to the business and human rights movement and other international corporate responsibility standards.

A Social Commons Ethos in Public Policy-Making

In the business ethics literature, a commons paradigm orients theorizing toward how civil society can promote collaboration and collectively govern shared resources, and implicates the common good—the ethics of providing social conditions that enable individuals and collectives to thrive. In the context of representative democracies, the shared resources of a nation can be considered commons, yet these resources are governed in a top-down, bureaucratic manner wherein public participation is often limited to voting for political leaders. Such governance, however, can be motivated by values of solidarity and stewardship, and a bottom-up approach to participation, in ways that are consistent with a social commons ethos (Meyer and Hudon in J Bus Ethics 160:277–292, 2019). We employ an inductive methodology focused on successes and possibilities, using data from interviews with 93 policy-makers and national-level government leaders in 5 democratic countries, and observational and archival data. We reveal how governments can operationalize a social commons ethos in decision-making. This approach to governance involves stakeholder engagement that is Broad, Deep, and Continual (BDC). In this model, leaders engage a wide breadth of stakeholders, engage them deeply and meaningfully throughout the decision-making process, and sustain this engagement in a continual manner. Implications for governance of non-governmental bureaucracies are discussed, including the normative and strategic benefits of engaging stakeholders in this manner.

Good Barrels Yield Healthy Apples: Organizational Ethics as a Mechanism for Mitigating Work-Related Stress and Promoting Employee Well-Being

Little is known about how ethical organizational contexts influence employees’ perceived stress levels and well-being. This study used two theoretical lenses, ethical impact theory (Promislo et al. in Handbook of Unethical Work Behavior, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, 2013) and ethical decision-making theory (Schwartz in J Bus Ethics 139(4): 755–776, 2016), to investigate the relationships among perceived organizational ethics (comprised of ethical climate, leader/manager ethics, and corporate social responsibility), work-related stress, and employee well-being (comprised of vitality, life satisfaction, personal growth initiative, flourishing, positive mental health, and self-actualization). Findings across two studies indicated that organizational ethics was negatively related to work-related stress, and that work-related stress was negatively related to employee well-being. Perceived organizational ethics is positively related to employee well-being, with post hoc mediation tests indicating that work-related stress partially mediates this relationship. Our findings suggest that organizations should be proactive in improving their ethical climate, such as choosing ethical leaders, developing a robust and well-communicated code of ethics, and actively practicing CSR. These measures should reduce excessive work-related stress and improve employee well-being.

Ethical, Virtuous, and Charismatic Leadership: An Examination of Differential Relationships with Follower and Leader Outcomes

Several alternative leadership approaches have been introduced to supplement the long-standing transformational leadership (TL) model (Bass in Leadership and performance beyond expectations, New York, Free Press, 1985; Bass and Avolio in Multifactor leadership questionnaire, 2000) as concerns have grown that it did not place enough emphasis on leader ethics. Nonetheless, to establish the value of the newer approaches, evidence of conceptual and empirical distinctiveness is required. Though meta-analysis has been somewhat helpful in this regard (e.g., Bedi et al. in J Bus Ethics 139(3):517–536, 2016), we conducted two within-study comparisons of ethical leadership (Brown et al. in Org Behav Human Decis Process 97:117–134, 2005), virtuous leadership (Wang and Hackett in J Bus Ethics 137:321–345, 2016) and key components of TL (idealized influence and inspirational motivation; Bass and Avolio 2000) reflected by socialized charismatic leadership. We predicted that these alternative models differ in the strength of their ties to a range of valued outcomes. Our analyses of 230 leader–follower dyads based predominately in North America (Sample 1) and US-based 131 dyads (Sample 2) left many hypotheses unsupported; nonetheless, there was evidence of differential associations. For example, across both samples, in the context of all three models, follower-rated ethical leadership (Brown et al. 2005) was the only significant predictor of follower-rated leader effectiveness, leader-rated subordinate in-role performance, and leader-rated follower ethicality. As hypothesized, virtuous leadership (Wang and Hackett 2016) was the strongest predictor of self-rated leader happiness in Sample 1, but contrary to expectations, in Sample 2, only the TL components (Bass and Avolio 2000) were related to happiness and life satisfaction among both leaders and followers.

Problems of Fact, Method, Theory, and Concepts in Tsoukas (2018)

On January, 27, 2017, U.S. President Donald J. Trump issued Executive Order 13769 on immigration and travel (EO 13769), which restricted entry into the U.S. of the citizens of seven primarily Muslim countries. Many academics reacted with outrage, including me and other members of the Academy of Management (AOM), of which I was President at the time. Some scholarly associations condemned EO 13769 as immoral, but the AOM did not immediately issue such a condemnation because the AOM’s Constitution included a policy of no-political-stands (NPSP) and a principle that nobody, including the AOM President, could represent personal views as those of the organization. Within a few weeks, the AOM Constitution was changed, and in October, 2017, the AOM joined other associations in issuing a condemnation. An article was published in this journal on this situation (Tsoukas in J Bus Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3979-y, 2018) that was subsequently amended through a published Correction (Tsoukas in J Bus Ethics, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04194-9, 2019), but the Correction only partially addressed the problems in the original. The main contribution of this commentary is to take up the invitation in Tsoukas (2018) to examine the case for insights on theoretical and conceptual questions raised in the literature on prototypicality and moral imagination. It also briefly outlines the most significant omitted errors of fact in Tsoukas (2018) that were not corrected in Tsoukas (2019), and describes the most important methodological problems in Tsoukas (2018). The conclusion suggests that the complex, nuanced, and evolving interactions that unfolded at the AOM are not fully addressed theoretically or conceptually in this literature.

“Speaking on Behalf of…”: Leadership Ethics and the Collective Nature of Moral Reflection

In this essay I discuss two limitations that emerge when considering Tsoukas (J Bus Ethics 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3979-y ) analysis of the Academy of Management’s (AOM) initial response to the travel ban issued by President Trump in 2017. First, I suggest that any initial official response on the part of AOM would have required its leaders to “speak on behalf of” all AOM members and thus would have created a number of problems. We therefore need to take better account of others’ perspectives (“speaking with”) whenever speaking for others. For this reason I emphasize that moral imagination does not constitute a solely individual cognitive act but must be thought of as a deliberative process. Second, while Tsoukas’ analysis suggests that the leadership of AOM should have made an exception to the rule on taking public stands, I show that such exceptions need to be justified communicatively, especially when dealing with moral questions. My analysis outlines the formal and informal communication processes necessary to facilitate such justification and explores ways in which AOM’s current approach to deliberation can be improved.

Some Virtue Ethics Implications from Aristotelian and Confucian Perspectives on Family and Business

Not only individuals and firms, but also families engage in business as a social activity and this is true beyond the case of family businesses. Cultural differences in the way families are construed might influence the way they do business. There are different types of families, and among these are those described by Aristotelian and Confucian traditions, representing the West and the East respectively. The literature on virtue in business has been dominated by a Western—mainly Aristotelian—tradition (Ferrero and Sison in Bus Ethics Eur Rev 30(1): 8–24, 2014), neglecting the role of the family and focusing on the individual. In this paper, we seek to fill this gap by explaining differences and similarities in the normative evaluation of certain family-related business attitudes and practices, in light of Confucian and Aristotelian virtue ethics standards. After comparing the structure, organization and dynamics of Aristotelian and Confucian families, we shall draw some inferences regarding “virtuous” or excellent business practices—such as nepotism, bribery, gift-giving and guanxi and attitudes—on codified rules or written norms. For this analysis we shall make use of Aristotelian and Confucian ethical accounts as well as inputs from Family Science applied to organizations, which provides conceptual categories to compare the two traditions. Thus we hope to contribute not only to the comparative study of Aristotelian and Confucian virtue ethics in business, but also to the understanding of the distinctive role of families, raising cultural awareness for what may be considered virtuous business practices according to the Aristotelian and Confucian traditions.

The Influence of a Family Business Climate and CEO–CFO Relationship Quality on Misreporting Conduct

This study answers Vazquez’s (J Bus Ethics 150(3):691–709, 2016) call for more research focused on the intersection between family firms and business ethics. We investigate two contextual factors potentially affecting the ethical reporting of chief financial officers (CFOs): a firm’s social ties to the controlling family and the CFOs’ perceived relationship quality with the CEO. We test our hypotheses by examining the financial reporting behavior of Chinese CFOs who work at (1) family or nonfamily businesses and in (2) private or public firms. Results of this study advance our understanding of social and contextual factors that may compromise CFOs' reporting behavior in family firms (Suh et al., J Bus Ethics, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3982-3 ). This research also suggests that failure to distinguish between public and private companies may bias the results of studies that examine family firms.

Using Social Media to Attract Customers in Lebanon

Social media nowadays have become part of our everyday life. People around the world spend most of their time on social media, (Face book, Instagram, Twitter, etc.), so this network becomes a way that affect people’s decisions especially their purchasing decision in the pre-purchasing stage. Thus, businesses are using the social media for marketing to let the customers in any place in the world knows about their brand and products without even visiting their shop. This media has enabled people from anywhere to access grocery stores and restrooms without any time constraint through electronic devices, such as computers, mobile phones, etc (Bernhardt et al., 2012; Enrico Di et al., 2018). Social media has been recognized as an informative venue in that it assists the relationship among customers by sharing their experiences, which can provide valuable information for others (Alalwan, 2018; Hajli and Bus Ethics, 2018; Sheth and Kim, 2018; Sujin and Myongjee, 2016). More than two-thirds of companies are using social media for marketing and service (Ma et al., 2015; Muhammad et al., 2018; Si Shi et al., 2019). As consumers increase their online activity today, the industries and businesses become to use it as a way of sharing information and opinion about their product. This way let marketing become easier, since it provides instant information for the consumer at any time from the entire world. Social media has emerged as a dominant digital communications channel and has significantly influenced the marketing communications environment. Not only does it allow interaction between customers and companies (FangPei Su et al., 2018; Gretzel and Fesenmaier, 2012; Gretzel and Dinhopl, 2013; Kristina et al., 2018; Muresan and Sinuraya, 2018; Rebecca et al., 2019) but also among customers (Xiang and Gretzel, 2010). It make the communication with other customers that used the product become easier, in this way they can know more about any product they want (Jiabao et al., 2019; Kumar and Pradhan, 2018) The aim of this research is to know whether social media can affect customer purchasing decision during the pre-purchase stage This research aims to answer the following research question: RQ1: Do social media influence customer purchasing decision. RQ2: Do people prefer advertising using social media. To explore these questions, a study will be done to see the influence of social media advertising on customers. The objective of this research is to help the marketing professional.