Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Business Ethics
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics 4/2013

01.04.2013

Participating in the Common Good of the Firm

verfasst von: Alejo José G. Sison, Joan Fontrodona

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Ausgabe 4/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In a previous essay (Sison and Fontrodona 2012), we defined the common good of the firm as collaborative work, insofar as it provides, first, an opportunity to develop knowledge, skills, virtues, and meaning (work as praxis), and second, inasmuch as it produces goods and services to satisfy society’s needs and wants (work as poiesis). We would now like to focus on the participatory aspect of this common good. To do so, we will have to identify the different members of the firm as a community, drawing from corporate citizenship literature and stakeholder theory. Afterward, we will explore both the manner and the intensity of these different members’ participation and its impact on the firm’s common good.
Vorheriger Artikel Kant on Virtue
Nächster Artikel Virtue and Commerce in Domingo de Soto’s Thought: Commercial Practices, Character, and the Common Good

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Fußnoten
1
In Aristotle, apart from poiesis, praxis is also paired and contrasted with other concepts, such as kinesis (imperfect movement) and theoria (contemplation). It is beyond the scope of this article to deal with the full range of meanings attached to praxis here. What is important is to underscore that, in praxis, the focus is on subjective, internal outcomes, while in poiesis, it is on objective, external outcomes. The goal in praxis is the realization of the activity itself, whereas in poiesis, it is the production of something external. Moreover, in the foregoing senses, mastery or excellence in praxis is generally known as phronesis (practical wisdom), and in poiesis, techne (technical expertise).
 
2
Again, we cannot delve extensively into the complex sociological implications of the differentiation between poiesis and praxis. However, Aristotle here expresses a widespread view in ancient civilizations that in a way continues in the yet unresolved tensions between management and labor in modern industrial societies.
 
3
There are exceptions, however, as can clearly be seen in the case of rhetoric. Undeniably, Athenian gentlemen engaged in rhetoric, a poiesis governed by a techne (Aristotle 1991, Rhetoric 1355b9-25). We may assume that they carried this out ultimately in the interest of self-governance (a praxis) under the guidance of phronesis. In other words, some poiesis such as rhetoric may be pursued for an ulterior end internal to the agent or actor that somehow makes it akin to a praxis. Indeed it is unfortunate that Aristotle did not pursue this intuition further, as this may have led him to a much closer position to that espoused by CST. We thank one reviewer for this valuable insight.
 
4
However, toward the end of the NE (1177a11-1179a33), Aristotle seems to suffer from a platonic lapse when he describes the contemplation of the supreme good—basically an idea or form—as the best life for man.
 
Literatur
Aristotle. (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
Aristotle. (1990). In S. Everson (Ed.), The politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aristotle. (1991). Aristotle on rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse (G. A. Kennedy, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effects of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177–181.CrossRef
Assländer, M. S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility as subsidiary co-responsibility: A macroeconomic perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 115–128.CrossRef
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRef
Boatright, J. (2000). Ethics and the conduct of business. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bogle, J. C. (2005). The battle for the soul of capitalism. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.
Bogle, J. C. (2011). The Supreme Court had its say. Now let shareholders decide. The New York Times, 14 May.
Ciulla, J. (2000). The working life: The promise and betrayal of modern work. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Clarkson, M., & Deck, M. (1998). Stockholder. In P. Werhane & R. E. Freeman (Eds.), The Blackwell encyclopedic dictionary of business ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2004). Business ethics: A European perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2003). Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. International Center for Corporate Social Resposibility (ICCSR) Research Paper Series, no 13, ISSN 1479-5116.
Dill, W. (1958). Environment as an influence on managerial autonomy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2(4), 409–443.
Dittmar, H. (1992). The social psychology of material possessions: To have is to be. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91.
Faldetta, G., & Paternostro, S. (2011). The logic of gift and the bonding value: A new perspective for business management. Journal of Management Development, 30(6), 594–604.CrossRef
Franke, N., Schreier, M., & Kaiser, U. (2010). The ‘I designed it myself’ effect in mass customization. Management Science, 56(1), 125–140.CrossRef
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
Freeman, R.E. (1998). Stakeholder theory. In P. Werhane & R. E. Freeman (Eds.), The Blackwell encyclopedic dictionary of business ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Furby, L. (1991). Understanding the psychology of possession and ownership: A personal memoir and an appraisal of our progress. Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 66, 457–463.
Hasnas, J. (1998). The normative theories of business ethics: A guide for the perplexed. Business Ethics Quarterly, 8, 19–42.CrossRef
Jensen, M. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12, 235–256.CrossRef
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98(6), 1325–1348.CrossRef
Kennedy, R. (2007). Business and the common good. In P. Booth (Ed.), Catholic Social Teaching and the market economy. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Kim, D.-W. (2003). Interlocking ownership in the Korean chaebol. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 11(2), 132–142.CrossRef
Manville, B., & Ober, J. (2003). A company of citizens. What the world’s first democracy teaches leaders about creating great organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Mason, R.O., & Mitroff, I.I. (1982). Challenging Strategic Planning Assumptions. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Mizruchi, M. S. (2004). Berle and means revisited: The governance and power of large US corporations. Theory and Society, 33, 579–617.CrossRef
Moore, G. (2004). The fair trade movement: Parameters, issues and future research. Journal of Business Ethics, 53, 73–86.CrossRef
Moore, G., Slack, R., & Gibbon, J. (2009). Criteria for responsible business practice in SMEs: An exploratory case of UK fair trade organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 173–188.CrossRef
Moriarty, J. (2009). Participation in the workplace: Are employees special? Journal of Business Ethics, 93, 373–384.
Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., & Ariely, D. (2011). The ‘IKEA effect’: When labor leads to love. Harvard Business School Working Paper, 11-091, 33 pp.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The Good Soldier Syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10(2), 85–97.CrossRef
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. (2004). Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.
Sandelands, L. (2009). The business of business is the human person: Lessons from the Catholic social tradition. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(1), 93–101.CrossRef
Schnake, M. E., & Dumler, M. P. (2003). Levels of measurement and analysis issues in organizational citizenship behavior research. Journal of Organizational and Occupational Psychology, 76, 283–301.CrossRef
Schrift, A.D. (1997). The logic of gift. Toward an ethic of generosity. New York: Routledge.
Sison, A. J. G. (2008). Corporate Governance and Ethics. An Aristotelian Perspective. UK: Edward Elgar.
Sison, A. J. G., & Fontrodona, J. (2012). The common good of the firm in the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(2), 211–246.
Stokes, G. (2002). Democracy and citizenship. In A. Carter & G. Stokes (Eds.), Democratic theory today. Cambridge: Polity Press.
The Economist. (2010a). The chaebol conundrum, 31 March.
The Economist. (2010b). Return of the overlord, 31 March.
The Economist. (2011a). Asia’s new model company, 1 October.
The Economist. (2011b). The next big bet, 1 October.
Thompson, J.D. (1967). Organization in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
White, M. P., & Dolan, P. (2009). Accounting for the richness of daily activities. Psychological Science, 20(8), 1000–1008.CrossRef
Wood, D. J., Logsdon, J. M., Lewellyn, P. G., & Davenport, K. (2006). Global business citizenship. A transformative framework for ethics and sustainable capitalism. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Metadaten
Titel
Participating in the Common Good of the Firm
verfasst von
Alejo José G. Sison
Joan Fontrodona
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2013
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1684-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2013

Journal of Business Ethics 4/2013 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

In Search of Virtue: The Role of Virtues, Values and Character Strengths in Ethical Decision Making

OriginalPaper

Virtue and Vice Attributions in the Business Context: An Experimental Investigation

EditorialNotes

Editorial Introduction: Putting Virtues Into Practice. A Challenge for Business and Organizations

OriginalPaper

Corporate Transparency: A Perspective from Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae

OriginalPaper

Kant on Virtue

OriginalPaper

Managerial Work in a Practice-Embodying Institution: The Role of Calling, The Virtue of Constancy

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise