nach oben

Journal of Business Ethics

Erschienen in:

01.03.2011

Hybrid Forms of Business: The Logic of Gift in the Commercial World

Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics | Sonderheft 1/2011

Einloggen

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

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Benedict XVI in Caritas in Veritate advances a positive view of businesses that are hybrids between several traditional categories. He expects that the “logic of gift” that animates civil society infuses the market and the State with relations typical for it—reciprocity, gratuitousness, and solidarity. His theological rationale offers an answer to two questions that have largely remained open in the literature—why hybridization of business occurs and why it is desirable. A rational reconstruction of hybrid enterprise that goes beyond a simple taxonomy of types benefits from the Pope’s call for an intrinsic integration of institutions and processes traditionally attributed to disparate spheres. The relational model of the Trinity defines the unity in diversity that accounts for the benefits of truly hybrid businesses, and the “logic of gift” serves as the agent of integration.

Vorheriger Artikel The Common Good of Business: Addressing a Challenge Posed by «Caritas in Veritate»

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

The principal exception to this assessment is the group of Italian economists who may be referred to as the “Civil Economy School” (Bruni 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; Bruni and Zamagni 2007[2004], 2009). Some of them are associated with the Focolare Movement, and their ideas are reflected in Caritas in Veritate.

Italics in quotes indicate italics in the original text.

On economic arguments in Caritas in Veritate, see Grassl (2011a) and Grassl and Habisch (2011), and on theological arguments Grassl (2011b). The latter reasoning is not further pursued in the present paper.

Reciprocity in this sense must not be mistaken for the do ut des (‘I give so that you may give’) of reciprocal exchange (see Bruni 2008, 2010).

In fact, where Michael Novak ridiculed any attempt to “humanize” the corporation (Novak 1997, p. 1), Benedict XVI requests just this (CV 9, 18f., 21f., 42, 78). He views “profit as a means for achieving the goal of a more humane market and society” (CV 47) and understands his Encyclical as a contribution towards “civilizing the economy” (CV 38).

Even authors sympathetic to the “logic of gift” do not always follow Benedict XVI in the full impact of his vision. This is reflected in the definition of social enterprises as “autonomous not-for-profit organizations providing goods or services that explicitly aim to benefit the community” (Becchetti and Borzaga 2010, p. 7).

Characterizing Caritas in Veritate as “at best a relatively unremarkable restatement of some familiar themes from previous social encyclicals” (Woods 2009) betrays a deep misunderstanding of its theology of business.

In the left panel, strategic direction Φ = (P/M), and the 45-degree line is represented by P/M = 1, where P = profit orientation and S = social mission. Strategy under hybridization may be expressed as Φ_hyb = (M × C × S), where M = market, C = civil society, and S = State. The condition of Caritas in Veritate is: max Φ_hyb = [(∂M/M)/(∂C/C) + (∂S/S)/(∂C/C)] > 1 | ∂C/C > 0, i.e. civil society must increasingly invade the market and the State.

No distinction is drawn here between non-profit and not-for-profit enterprise.

Mixed and complex models are here ignored. Business models of social enterprise are analyzed in Grassl (2012).

In nature, cross-species hybrids such as mules are typically infertile. The biological analogy has therefore limits in the social world.

In sociolinguistics, pidgin languages, as merely utilitarian contact languages involving elements from two parents, are not native languages whereas creoles (such as Jamaican Patois) are first languages for particular communities. Only creole languages are stable and true hybrids (Holm 2000).

In more formal terms, the underlying business ontology is then simply a tuple < BUS [(Components_Bus, Relations_Bus), Processes], ENV_Bus > where ENV = business environment. ENV can, for example, be represented by relevant PESTEL (political, economic, social, technological, ecological, and legal) factors.

According to the rule “structure follows strategy”, a feedback of chosen strategy on the nature and relations of components may be assumed but is not of importance in the present context.

A multi-dimensional scale for measuring hybridity of organizations (based on ten metrics) between the private and public spheres has been proposed (Karré 2011) and may be generalized for cases of multi-domain hybridity.

Agarwal, R., Grassl, W., & Pahl, J. (2012). Beyond SWOT: Introducing a new strategic planning tool (forthcoming).

Alter, S. K. (2006). Social enterprise models and their mission and money relationships. In A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change (pp. 205–232). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Andrei, P., Balluchi, F., & Furlotti, K. (2010) Collaboration between for-profit and nonprofit organizations: Some insights into the encyclical Caritas in Veritate. In 16th international symposium on ethics, business and society, IESE Business School, Barcelona, May 13–15, 2010.

Aoki, M. (2001). Comparative institutional analysis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Aquinas, T. (1920–1942). Summa Theologica (Sec. and rev. ed.). Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. London: Burns, Oates & Washburne.

Arato, A., & Cohen, J. L. (1988). Civil society and social theory. Thesis Eleven, 21, 40–64.CrossRef

Aspen Institute. (2005). Enterprising organizations: New asset-based and other innovative approaches to solving social and economic problems. Aspen, CO: Aspen Institute.

Austin, J. E. (2000). Strategic collaboration between nonprofits and business. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 69–97.CrossRef

Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. (2010). Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6), 1419–1440.CrossRef

Bauwens, M. (2008). Par Cum Pari. Notes on the horizontality of peer to peer relationships in the context of the verticality of a hierarchy of values. In M. S. Archer & P. Donati (Eds.), Pursuing the common good: How solidarity and subsidiarity can work together (pp. 247–263). Vatican City: Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

Becchetti, L. (2009). Oltre l’homo oeconomicus. In Felicità, responsabilità, economia delle relazioni. Rome: Città Nuova.

Becchetti, L., & Borzaga, C. (Eds.). (2010). The economics of social responsibility. The world of social enterprises. Abingdon: Routledge.

Becchetti, L., Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (2011). Microeconomia: Scelte, relazioni, economia civile. Bologna: Il Mulino.

Becchetti, L., Pelloni, A., & Rossetti, F. (2008). Relational goods, sociability, and happiness. Kyklos, 61, 343–363.CrossRef

Ben-Ner, A. (2002). The shifting boundaries of the mixed economy and the future of the nonprofit sector. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 73, 5–40.CrossRef

Billis, D. (Ed.). (2010). Hybrid organizations and the third sector. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bollecker, G., & Nobre, T. (2010). L’évolution des paradoxes organisationnels: le cas d’une organisation de service public évoluant vers le modèle marchand. In 19th conférence AIMS, Luxembourg.

Bonaccorsi, A., Giannangeli, S., & Rossi, C. (2006). Entry strategies under competing standards: Hybrid business models in the open source software industry. Management Science, 52(7), 1085–1098.CrossRef

Botsman, R., & Rogers, R. (2010). What’s mine is yours: The rise of collaborative consumption. San Francisco: Harper Business.

Boulding, K. E. (1973). Challenge to leadership: Managing in a changing world. New York: Free Press.

Boyd, B., Henning, N., Reyna, E., Wang, D. E., & Welch, M. D. (2009). Hybrid organizations: New business models for environmental leadership. Sheffield: Greenleaf.

Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brandsen, T., & Karré, P. M. (2010). Hybride organisaties: een overzicht van het onderzoek in de Nederlandse Bestuurskunde. Bestuurswetenschappen, 64(2), 71–85.

Brandsen, T., van de Donk, W., & Putters, K. (2005). Griffins or Chameleons? Hybridity as a permanent and inevitable characteristic of the third sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 28(9–10), 749–765.CrossRef

Britt, F. F. (2002). Multiplying business value: The fusion of business and technology. Somer, NY: IBM Institute for Business Value.

Brody, E. (2003). Are nonprofit organizations different? In H. K. Anheier & A. Ben-Ner (Eds.), The study of the nonprofit enterprise: Theories and approaches (pp. 239–244). New York: Kluwer/Plenum.

Brown, M. T. (2010). Civilizing the economy: A new economics of provision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brozek, K. O. (2009). Exploring the continuum of social and financial returns: When does a nonprofit become a social enterprise? Community Development Investment Review, 5(2), 7–17.

Bruni, L. (2007a). La ferita dell’altro. Economia e relazioni umane. Trento: Il Margine.

Bruni, L. (2008). Reciprocity, altruism and the civil society. In praise of heterogeneity. Routledge: Abingdon. [original: Reciprocità. Dinamiche di cooperazione economia e società civile. Milan: Mondadori, 2006].

Bruni, L. (2009). L’impresa civile. Una via italiana all’economia di mercato. Milan: EGEA.

Bruni, L. (2010). Reciprocità e gratuità dentro il mercato. La proposta della Caritas in veritate. Aggiornamenti sociali, 61(1), 38–44.

Bruni, L. (2011). La leggerezza del ferro. Un’introduzione alla teoria economica delle Organizzazioni a Movente Ideale. Milan: Vita e Pensiero.

Bruni, L., & Smerilli, A. (2009). The value of vocation. The crucial role of intrinsically motivated people in values-based organizations. Review of Social Economy, 67(3), 271–288.CrossRef

Bruni, L., & Uelmen, A. J. (2006). Religious values and corporate decision making: The economy of communion project. Fordham Journal of Corporate and Financial Law, 11, 645–680.

Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (2007 [2004]). Civil economy. Efficiency, equity, public happiness. Berne: Peter Lang.

Bruni, L., & Zamagni, S. (Eds.). (2009). Dizionario di Economia Civile. Rome: Città Nuova.

Bunduchi, R., Smart, A. U., Williams, R., & Graham, I. (2008). Homogeneity and heterogeneity in IT private standard settings—the institutional account. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 20, 389–407.CrossRef

Callon, M., & Çalışkan, K. (2009). Economization. Part 1: Shifting attention from the economy towards processes of economization. Economy and Society, 38, 369–398.CrossRef

Cambón, E. (1999). Trinità modello sociale. Rome: Città Nuova.

Cambón, E. (2010). Comunione trinitaria e sviluppo sociale. Gen’s. Rivista di vita ecclesiale, 39(1/2), 7–14.

Casadesus-Masanell, R., & Ricart, J. E. (2011). How to design a winning business model. Harvard Business Review, 89(1), 2–9.

Clavero, B. (1991). Antidora. Antropología católica de la economía moderna. Milan: Giuffrè.

Cooney, K. (2006). The institutional and technical structuring of nonprofit ventures: Case study of a U.S. hybrid organization caught between two fields. Voluntas, 17, 143–161.CrossRef

Dahan, N. M., Doh, J. P., Oetzel, J., & Yaziji, M. (2010). Corporate-NGO collaboration: Co-creating new business models for developing markets. Long Range Planning, 43, 326–342.CrossRef

Dees, J. G. (1998). Enterprising nonprofits. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 54–67.

Defourny, J., & Nyssens, M. (2010). Conceptions of social enterprise in Europe and the United States: Convergences and divergences. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 32–53.CrossRef

Donati, P. (2009). Dono. In L. Bruni & S. Zamagni (Eds.) (pp. 279–291).

Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 33–52.

Emmert, M., & Crow, M. M. (1987). Public-private cooperation and hybrid organizations. Journal of Management, 13(1), 55–67.CrossRef

Evers, A., Rauch, U., & Stitz, U. (2002). Von öffentlichen Einrichtungen zu sozialen Unternehmen. Hybride Organisationsformen im Bereich sozialer Dienstleistungen. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

Fottler, M. D. (1981). Is management really generic? Academy of Management Review, 6(1), 1–12.

Frohlich, N., & Oppenheimer, J. (1984). Beyond economic man: Altruism, egalitarianism, and difference maximizing. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 28(1), 3–24.CrossRef

Gansky, L. (2010). The mesh: Why the future of business is sharing. New York, NY: Portfolio.

Gassler, R. S. (1986). The economics of nonprofit enterprise. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Giesler, M. (2006). Consumer gift systems. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(2), 283–290.CrossRef

Gold, L. (2010). New financial horizons. The emergence of an economy of communion. Hyde Park, NY: New City Press.

Goldstein, J. A., Hazy, J. K., & Silberstang, J. (Eds.). (2009). Complexity science and social entrepreneurship. Litchfield Park, AZ: ISCE.

Gomarasca, P. (2009). Meticciato: convivenza o confusione?. Venice: Marcianum Press.

Grassl, W. (1998). Cooperative marketing: Efficiency conditions for alliances. In T. Brunton & T. Lituchy (Eds.), Canada/Caribbean business: Opportunities and challenges for management (pp. 87–101). Port-of-Spain: University of the West Indies Press.

Grassl, W. (2010). Aquinas on management and its development. Journal of Management Development, 29, 706–715.CrossRef

Grassl, W. (2011a). ‘Civil economy: The trinitarian key to papal economics.’ Panel session on ‘economic justice and the encyclical Caritas in Veritate’. In Allied Social Science Associations conference, January 8, 2011, Denver, CO.

Grassl, W. (2011b). Pluris Valere: Towards trinitarian rationality in social life (forthcoming).

Grassl, W. (2012). Business models of social enterprise: A design approach to hybridity. ACRN Journal of Social Entrepreneurship Perspectives, 1(1).

Grassl, W., & Habisch, A. (2011). Ethics and economics: Towards a new humanistic synthesis for business. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(1), 37–49.CrossRef

Hemmerle, K. (1995). Leben aus der Einheit. Eine theologische Herausforderung. Freiburg: Herder.

Holm, J. (2000). An introduction to Pidgins and Creoles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jacobs, J. (1992). Systems of survival: A dialogue on the moral foundations of commerce and politics. New York: Vintage Books.

Karré, P. M. (2011). Heads and tails: Both sides of the coin. An analysis of hybrid organizations in the Dutch waste management sector. The Hague: Eleven International.

Keidel, R. W. (1995). Seeing organizational patterns. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Keidel, R. W. (2010). The geometry of strategy. New York: Routledge.

Kenis, P. (2005). Hybriditeit vanuit een netwerktheoretisch perspectief. Bestuurskunde, 14(3), 27–33.

Kerlin, J. A. (Ed.). (2009). Social enterprise: A global comparison. Medford, MA: Tufts University Press.

Koppell, J. G. S. (2003). The politics of quasi-government: Hybrid organizations and the dynamics of bureaucratic control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Landes Foster, W., Kim, P., & Christiansen, B. (2009). Ten nonprofit funding models. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring 2009.

Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: Making art and commerce thrive in the hybrid economy. New York: Penguin Press.CrossRef

Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Service-dominant logic: A necessary step. European Journal of Marketing, 45(7/8), 1298–1309.CrossRef

Makadok, R., & Coff, R. (2009). Both market and hierarchy; an incentive-system theory of hybrid governance forms. Academy of Management Review, 34(2), 297–319.CrossRef

Malki, S. (2009). Social entrepreneurship and complexity models. In J. A. Goldstein, J. K. Hazy & J. Silberstang (Eds.) (pp. 71–81).

Meeks, M. D. (1989). God the economist: The doctrine of god and political economy. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Mintzberg, H. (2009). Rebuilding companies as communities. Harvard Business Review, 87(4), 1–5.

Mintzberg, H., Molz, R., Raufflet, E., Sloan, P., Abdallah, C., Bercuvitz, R., et al. (2005). The invisible world of association. Leader to Leader, 36, 37–45.CrossRef

Molteni, M. (2009). Aziende a movente ideale. In L. Bruni & S. Zamagni (Eds.) (pp. 65–75).

Muniesa, F., Millo, Y., & Callon, M. (2007). An introduction to market devices. Sociological Review, 55(Suppl. 2), 1–12.CrossRef

Murphy, P. J., & Coombes, S. M. (2009). A model of social entrepreneurial discovery. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 325–336.CrossRef

Naughton, M. (2006). The corporation as a community of work: Understanding the firm within the catholic social tradition. Ave Maria Law Review, 4, 33–75.

Nederveen Pieterse, J. (2003). Globalization and culture: Global Mélange. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Novak, M. (1982). The spirit of democratic capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Novak, M. (1990). Toward a theology of the corporation (Rev.ed.). Washington: AEI Press.

Novak, M. (1997). On corporate governance: The corporation as it ought to be. Washington: AEI Press.

Nyssens, M. (Ed.). (2006). Social enterprise. At the crossroads of market, public policies, and civil society. London: Routledge.

Ostrom, W. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672.CrossRef

Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 83–96.CrossRef

Pestoff, V. A. (1992). Third sector and co-operative services—an alternative to privatization. Journal of Consumer Policy, 15(1), 21–45.CrossRef

Petrini, C. (2007). Slow food nation: Why our food should be good, clean, and fair. New York, NY: Rizzoli.

Petrini, C. (2010). Terra Madre: Forging a new global network of sustainable food communities. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

Plé, L., Lecocq, X., & Angot, J. (2010). Customer-integrated business models: A theoretical framework. M@n@gement, 13(4), 226–265.

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (PCJP). (2004). Compendium of the social doctrine of the church. Rome: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2001). The big idea: Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77.

Préfontaine, L. (2008). Les PPP, des projets risqués? In M. Boisclair & L. Dallaire (Eds.), Les défis du partenariat dans les administrations publiques. Un regard systémique (pp. 201–218). Québec: Presses de l’Université du Québec.

Raab, J., & Kenis, P. N. (2009). Heading toward a society of networks: Empirical developments and theoretical challenges. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18(3), 198–210.

Rainey, H. G., & Han Chan, Y. (2007). Public and private management compared. In E. Ferlie, L. Lynn, & C. Politt (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 72–102). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ramírez, R. (1999). Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 49–65.CrossRef

Ratzinger, J. (1986). Church and economy: Responsibility for the future of the world economy, Communio, 13(3), 199–204 (originally: ‘Marktwirtschaft und Ethik‘. In L. Roos (Ed.), Stimmen der Kirche zur Wirtschaft. 2/e (pp. 50–58). Cologne: J.P. Bachem.

Ridley-Duff, R. (2008). Social enterprise as a socially rational business. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 14(5), 291–312.CrossRef

Ridley-Duff, R., & Bull, M. (2011). Understanding social enterprise. London: Sage.

Robison, L. J., & Ritchie, B. K. (2010). Relationship economics. Farnham: Gower.

Salo, A., Tähtinen, J., & Ulkuniemi, P. (2009). Twists and turns of triad business relationship recovery. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(6), 618–632.CrossRef

Santos, F. M. (2009). A positive theory of social entrepreneurship. Working Paper 2009/23/EFE/ISIC, INSEAD Business School, Fontainebleau.

Seelos, C., & Mair, J. (2007). Profitable business models and market creation in the context of deep poverty: A strategic view. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21, 49–63.CrossRef

Shirky, C. (2010). Cognitive surplus: Creativity and generosity in a connected age. New York, NY: Penguin.

Sirico, R. A. (2010). The entrepreneurial vocation. In W. W. Gasparski, L. V. Ryan, & S. Kwiatkowski (Eds.), Entrepreneurship: Values and responsibility (pp. 153–175). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Skelcher, C. (2005). Public–private partnerships and hybridity. In L. Lynn, C. Politt, & E. Ferlie (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 347–370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Teehanke, B. L. (2008). Humanistic entrepreneurship: An approach to virtue-based enterprise. Asia-Pacific Social Science Review, 8(1), 89–110.CrossRef

Tekula, R. (2010). Social enterprise: Innovation or mission distraction? New York: Helene and Grant Wilson Cen-ter for Social Entrepreneurship, Pace University.

Testart, A. (2007). Critique du don: Études sur la circulation non marchande. Paris: Syllepse.

Uelmen, A. J. (2004). Toward a trinitarian theory of products liability. Journal of Catholic Social Thought, 1, 603–645.

Weigel, G. (2009). Caritas in Veritate in gold and red. National Review, July 7, 2009.

Westall, A. (2009). Business or third sector? What are the dimensions and implications of researching and conceptualising the overlap between business and third sector? Working Paper 26, Third Sector Research Centre, Economic and Social Research Council.

Wicks, R. (2009). A model of dynamic balance among the three spheres of society—markets, gov-ernments, and communities—applied to understanding the relative importance of social capital and social goods. International Journal of Social Economics, 36, 365–535.CrossRef

Woods, T. E. Jr. (2009). Truth & charity. Taki’s Magazine, August 7, 2009, available at: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/truth_charity. Accessed September 15, 2011.

Yao, S. G. (2003). Taxonomizing hybridity. Textual Practice, 17(2), 357–378.CrossRef

Young, D. R. (2007). The market transformation of nonprofits and philanthropy. Atlanta, GA: Georgia State University, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Working Paper 07-03.

Titel: Hybrid Forms of Business: The Logic of Gift in the Commercial World
Publikationsdatum: 01.03.2011
Erschienen in: Journal of Business Ethics / Ausgabe Sonderheft 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1182-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Sonderheft 1/2011

Transparency in Business: The Perspective of Catholic Social Teaching and the “Caritas in Veritate”

Goods That are Truly Good and Services that Truly Serve: Reflections on “Caritas in Veritate”

The Encyclical-Letter “Caritas in Veritate”: Ethical Challenges for Business

The Common Good of Business: Addressing a Challenge Posed by «Caritas in Veritate»

Human Development and the Pursuit of the Common Good: Social Psychology or Aristotelian Virtue Ethics?

The Morality of Bargaining: Insights from “Caritas in Veritate”