Search results

Capitalism is under siege (Porter & Kramer, 2011), and business schools are under fire (Amann et al., 2013). So, management and leadership education in higher education institutions should be reinvented under the more challenging era of capitalism. How then can business schools cope with these challenges and contribute to global endeavor for making sustainable capitalism? In this context, there is thus reason for the following three core concerns that new understanding of management and leadership education is required. First, shortcomings of contemporary capitalism lead to failures of responsible management. Second, ethical failure of management leadership is a pressing issue. Third, academic responsibility under the new capitalism remains unexamined. Based on these three core concerns, we seek to generate inclusive insights into the educational embeddedness of management and leadership members and the consequences of such embeddedness on managerial processes, structures, and outcomes under contemporary capitalism.

The evolution of capitalism has gone through four major epochs, from the first tangible exchanges of goods and resources, to the generation of wealth by entrepreneurs held personally accountable for their actions, to cost-cutting measures for increasing efficiencies and maximizing wealth for the few, and finally to a socially irresponsible form. The fourth epoch dispatched the last remaining shards of capitalist responsibility to anyone but investors, as the basis of wealth appropriation shifted to manipulating the speculative future worth of intangible or fictitious capital. This evolution through four epochs has sadly been a process of diminishing value creation (Boje et al., 2017).

We are trapped in an era of socially irresponsible capitalism with little respect for humankind. But, it was not always this way. The earliest references to entrepreneurial behavior emerged in the east during the Han Dynasty and in the west in the eighteenth century. Somewhat like the fourth epoch of the twenty-first century, these global beginnings of early capitalism were also directed by opportunistic desires to pursue wealth generation by taking advantage of people’s needs and wants. Although capitalists have consistently been the prime directors of resources and the distributors of wealth, in the early epochs of capitalism they were different. The early epoch entrepreneurs bore personal risks of business failure, consequences that might impact them for a lifetime.

The antenarrative generative mechanisms, or spirals, help us understand the interconnectivities of “real” and “actual” domains of reality (Bhaskar, 1975; Boje, 2016). Socially irresponsible capitalism is pulling global societies into a downward spiral toward an addiction of speculative destruction and dehumanization, transforming “real” into “actual” realities. We need a force to pull us back up toward a revitalized form of socially responsible capitalism. This force is called the socio-economic approach to management (SEAM), and in the responsible entrepreneurial spirit of earlier epochs, the path to recovery can be accomplished by accountably working with one organization or entity at a time.

This chapter first investigates the historical double-spiral-helix footsteps of socially irresponsible capitalism in the making. Then through a SEAM project example, we discuss how the micro-societal perspective of an organization places it at a deeper level of reality, deeper within the double-spiral-helix meta-reality of macro-societal capitalism. Finally, we demonstrate how the socioeconomic approach can help diagnose the deeper realities with an organization, beyond the evident narratives, to reveal the third spiral of deficiencies. This third spiral disenables the organization’s ability to activate the micro forces of socially responsible capitalism.

From a perspective of ‘critical performativity’, John Lewis is of special interest since it is celebrated as a successful organization and heralded as an alternative to more typical forms of capitalist enterprise.

Our analysis uses secondary empirical material (e.g. JLP documents in the public domain, histories of John Lewis and recent empirical research). Our assumption is that engagement and interrogation of existing empirical work can be at least as illuminating and challenging as undertaking new studies. In addition to generating fresh insights, stimulating reflection and fostering debate, our analysis is intended to contribute to an appreciation of how structures of ownership and governance are significant in enabling and constraining practices of organizing and managing.

The structures of ownership and governance at John Lewis, a major UK employee-owned retailer, have been commended by those who wish to recuperate capitalism and by those who seek to transform it.

JLP can be read as a ‘subversive intervention’ insofar as it denies absentee investors access to, and control of, its assets. Currently, however, even the critical performative potential of the Partnership model is impeded by its paternalist structures. Exclusion of Partners’ participation in the market for corporate control is reflected in, and compounded by, a weak form of ‘democratic’ governance, where managers are accountable to Partners but not controlled by them.

Our contention is that JLP’s ownership and governance structures offer a practical demonstration, albeit flawed, of how an alternative form of organization is sufficiently ‘efficient’ and durable to be able to ‘compete’ against joint-stock companies.

By examining the cooperative elements of the John Lewis structures of ownership and governance, we illuminate a number of issues faced in realizing the principles ascribed to employee-owned cooperatives – notably, with regard to ‘democratic member control’, ‘member economic participation’ and ‘autonomy and independence’.

This chapter presents a case study involving a socio-economic Organizational Development (OD) project carried out in a European subsidiary of a large multinational corporation traded on the New York Stock Exchange. This research case study, one of the 1,854 socio-economic interventions undertaken by the ISEOR research center, was chosen for its good illustration of the OD engineering process. It connects the dots between OD and financial performance, between immediate results and the creation of potential. We look at some of the tools and methods, such as overhauling loss and profit accounts and balance sheets with an eye on socio-economic balance, to illustrate socioeconomic tools at work and how they help enhance compatibility between the objectives of all stakeholders, including shareholders. With this case study, we also set out to provide food for thought on the contribution of socio-economic OD to the construction of socially responsible capitalism (Savall et al., 2015).

Mankind stands at a turning point in time as empires crumble, old enemies make peace, and the old‐order based on nation‐states is threatened. But, regrettably, it seems scholars are increasingly playing dysfunctional roles: instead of preaching tolerance and understanding fit for a Global Village built peace and cooperation, voices of intolerance and extremism are making significant inroads into the ivory tower.

Despite considerable research and constant pressure from global media, exploitation has been a persistent problem in the Bangladeshi ready-made garment (RMG) supply chain. Yet, the root causes of how and why exploitation still persists remain unexplored. This paper explores the reasons underlying the existence of exploitation in the RMG supply chain of Bangladesh using the theoretical lens of responsible capitalism.

Drawing on 98 interviews conducted at multiple levels of the RMG supply chain ecosystem, site visits, observation and archives, the authors unpack the underlying reasons for the existence of exploitation in Bangladeshi RMG supply chain.

Using the theoretical lens of responsible capitalism, the findings suggest the existence of exploitation as a multifaceted yet nuanced phenomenon that is a result of complex power dynamics, interdependency and interconnectedness of players at multiple levels of the supply chain. The authors extend responsible capitalism theory by adding local context as a key determinant for the RMG supply chain to be responsive, effective and sustainable. The authors further argue the need for a new business model in global supply chain that calls for a fundamental shift of businesses towards responsible capitalism via transformative actions at multiple levels for balancing power in relationships, generate profit with ethical integrity and take responsibility of the consequences of their actions.

The authors use a contextualized case study of the RMG supply chain in Bangladesh using a critical realist approach. Although the use of contextualized case study has enabled better understanding of causal relationships between management practices and exploitation in the local context of Bangladesh, a quantitative approach to establish causality between different factors could be the focus of future research. The findings are specific to the context of Bangladeshi RMG supply chain and may have limited generalizability in other contexts. Further studies may build upon the findings to explore exploitation in RMG supply chain of other sectors and countries in the region and compare the findings to develop comprehensive understanding about the root causes of exploitation.

The findings call for a fundamental shift of business towards responsible capitalism via transformative actions of multiple players across different levels of the supply chains with managerial implications.

By drawing on empirical research, the authors provide a holistic perspective of responsible capitalism that is influenced by interactions and interconnectedness of players in multiple levels of the supply chain. The authors expand the responsible capitalism theory by adding local context as a key determinant that need to be considered for supply chains to be responsive, effective and sustainable.

The purpose of this paper is to show that steering overall performance requires not only juxtaposing indicators focused on economic, social and environmental performance but also negotiating the measurement of performance metrics with all the stakeholders.

This is an action-research and intervention-research project aimed at experimenting an integrated and negotiated management control system for overall performance. The choice for the case study is a hospital in the Middle East that practices green management and that has to be self-financed while accepting all patients, even those who cannot pay.

The integration of the three dimensions of overall performance requires involving all stakeholders in the implementation of innovative management control.

The case is a pilot experiment and shows the conditions for an appropriate design of an overall performance management control methodology. However, further experiments should be carried out to shed light on the factors that form invariants regarding integrated performance log-books.

The study design is that of a management control methodology that enables the short- and long-run economic impacts of social and environmental performance.

The action-research process has proved to be a learning experience for the hospital and both internal and external stakeholders. However, replicability remains to be proven through experimenting the method in various settings.

This paper shows the need for negotiation of overall performance with all stakeholders to design and implement an appropriate participative approach to management control.

Here Marx's philosophy is dissected from the angle of bourgeois capitalism which he, Marx, sought to overcome. His social, political and economic ideas are criticised. Although it is noted that Marx wanted to ameliorate human suffering, the result turned out to be Utopian, contrary to his own intentions. Contrary to Marx, it is individualism that makes the best sense and capitalism that holds out the best hope for coping with most of the problems he sought to solve. Marx's philosophy is alluring but flawed at a very basic level, namely, where it denies the individuality of each person and treats humanity as “an organic body”. Capitalism, while by no means out to guarantee a perfect society, is the best setting for the realisation of the diverse but often equally noble human goals of its membership.