Business ethics, restrictions on employment and knowledge management
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to address ethical and legal issues relating to employment contracts and the effect on knowledge transfer. Design/methodology/approach: Relevant literature for business competition, learning and knowledge management and ethics were reviewed to prepare this paper. Findings: This paper was an opportunity to express an opinion that employment contracts should reflect economic realities of both the employer and the employed to encourage high‐ethical standards. Practical implications: Employers and the employed may be encouraged to forthrightly discuss issues relating to ethics and competition in light of changing economic conditions. Originality/value: This paper offers a self‐help perspective for employees, making them more aware of employment contract terms and responsibilities. Employers may be encouraged to craft more progressive contracts to not only protect business proprietary information and maintain ethical integrity, but also assist employees in taking control of their futures.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The continuous moderator approach is essential for knowledge creation, knowledge discovery, knowledge maintenance, knowledge sharing, and knowledge implementation.
“The continuous moderator approach is essential for knowledge creation, knowledge dis -covery, knowledge maintenance, knowledge sharing, and knowledge implementation (Choi and Lee 2002; Gayton 2008 ; Umar et al. 2012; Parirokh et al. 2008; Daneshgar and Bosanquet 2010 ).”
From Working capital management impact on Zimbabwe’s listed consumer services firms’ profitability and the influence of external factors via governance policy (2025) · cites this paper as Gayton 2008
Cites
Legal issues for the knowledge economy in the twenty‐first century
Gayton, C. M. (2006) · VINE · doi:10.1108/03055720610667327 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cosima, T., Ahmed, E. M., & Elfaki, K. E. (2025) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-025-02250-3
“The continuous moderator approach is essential for knowledge creation, knowledge dis - covery, knowledge maintenance, knowledge sharing, and knowledge implementation (Choi and Lee 2002; Gayton 2008 ; Umar et al. 2012; Parirokh et al. 2008; Daneshgar and Bosan-quet 2010 ).”
- Authors
- Gayton, C. M.
- Affiliations
- George Washington University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gayton, Cynthia M.
- Venue
- VINE
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2008-06-20
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 174-183
- ISSN
- 0305-5728 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1990975394
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 3.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- VINE (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Business Law and Ethics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Trade Secret Protection Methods
- Keywords
- business ethics, employment contracts, knowledge management, knowledge transfer, proprietary information, employee responsibility, employer-employee relations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
