Search results

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.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the current debate on value-intention link by investigating the hitherto unexplored relation between the concepts of the multidimensional work ethic profile and entrepreneurial intentions (EIs). In addition, this research seeks to offer specific insight into the work values and EIs of United Arab Emirates (UAE) national youth in an effort to contribute to decision making and policy formation for enhancing entrepreneurship.

In total, 309 UAE youth completed an Arabic version of the short form multidimensional work ethic profile (MWEP-SF) and a measure of EI.

Results confirm the value-intention link and support the view that values can direct work choices in entrepreneurship. The regression model identifies that the work ethics of wasted time, leisure, and self-reliance positively predict EI, while centrality of work is unrelated to EI.

The relation between work values and EI of youth is underexplored in the context of the UAE. The current extreme underrepresentation of UAE nationals in the private sector of the UAE economy highlights a significant problem for the UAE strategy of workforce nationalization. As the current findings reveal that the UAE youth possess work values which can predict EIs, the policy initiatives in the UAE may encourage Emirati nationals to more actively participate in the new venture creation and development. This will potentially facilitate the government to achieve the balance between public sector employability and self-employment contributions in the private sector.

This chapter examines the linkage between strategy and ethics in business.

We examine the implicit assumptions underlying the “business‐as‐war” versus the “business as value creation” models of business strategy. Drawing on the work of sociologists, we lay out the consequences those implicit assumptions have on the conduct of business.

We find that the “business‐as‐war” mindset sees corporations as sovereign states engaged in battle against other sovereign states, while the “value creation” mindset sees corporations as institutions engaged in an ongoing journey toward realizing potential, both in terms of capability and service. We further show how these two mindsets evoke different moral systems – a “guardian syndrome” for the “business‐as‐war” mindset and a “commercial syndrome” for the “value creation” mindset. Since both mindsets represent legitimate, though divergent moralities, we conclude that the recent crises in American business do not reflect the lack of morality or ethics. Rather, they reflect an application of an inappropriate morality/ethic dictated by the wrong model of business strategy.

This chapter serves executives by advocating a strategic mindset that that is more conducive to ethical business activity, and at the same time, is better suited to meeting the profit imperative and pressure from Wall Street. This chapter serves policy makers by showing that ethical reforms are unlikely to be effective if they simply add stiffer penalties without “changing the game” that executives are playing.

Economists have generally framed the question of welfare in terms of wealth creation and distribution. More recently this conception of welfare has been challenged by concerns for the unsustainability of expanding material wealth. Sustainability thus requires the expansions of welfare considerations to include the limits posed by the biophysical world within which all economic activity takes place. This paper pursues the question how the concept of ethics generally accepted and operative in mainline economics influences our understanding of sustainability. The question pursued is whether this concept of ethics can lead to sustainability or whether other ethical concepts are necessary to achieve a more compatible relationship between economic activity and sustainability? To pursue this question three ethical concepts are discussed: utilitarian ethic, discursive ethic, and the ethic of care. In each case the question is raised whether the ethical concept under consideration contributes to or undermines sustainability. The conclusion reached in this paper is that a utilitarian ethic leads to a perception of the links between economic activity and environmental context which is not likely to yield sustainable outcomes beyond an economically defined notion of sustainability. Discursive ethic and ethic of care have important contributions to make to redefining concept and implementation of broader sustainability goals.

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

Plato and Aristotle would have found the modern effort to fuse ethics and ecology to be incomprehensible. Despite the fact that oikos—meaning house or household—is a Greek word, Greek science did not entertain a concept of ecology. Nor did Greek philosophy regard nature as morally considerable. Etymology aside, the word ecology in anything like its modern sense of “biospheric house” did not appear in European thought until 1873 when Ernst Heinrich Haeckel, a German biologist and philosopher, used it, with the spelling “Oekologie,” in his The History of Creation. Furthermore, the words “ecology” and “ecological” always had exclusive reference, until quite recently, to a scientific discipline and not to a branch of philosophy. As with the Classical Greek philosophers, so it was also with modern thinkers. Ethics, they held, were concerned solely with interpersonal relations. They could not, therefore, recognize a duty to nature. That we do owe a duty to nature, however, is the carefully considered conclusion of most of the environmental ethicists.

The author argues that we must stop and take a look at what our insistence on human labour as the basis of our society is doing to us, and begin to search for possible alternatives. We need the vision and the courage to aim for the highest level of technology attainable for the widest possible use in both industry and services. We need financial arrangements that will encourage people to invent themselves out of work. Our goal, the article argues, must be the reduction of human labour to the greatest extent possible, to free people for more enjoyable, creative, human activities.

This paper aims to offer scholars and practitioners critical arguments on the strengths and weaknesses of the shared value concept and of the mental model of economics that lies at its heart. On the basis of these arguments, it proposes the paradigm of ethicological value-added creation as a new economic framework extending the shared value concept into a concept of lastingly viable business strategy.

Conceptual and philosophical analysis of the mental model of economics and of basic concepts and premises regarding scarcity, competition, growth and raising value. Application of this analysis to the re-design of the shared value approach and to the development of practical guidelines for sustainably viable business models.

This paper highlights how the shared value approach can be transformed into an even stronger strategic tool for the design of viable business models.

Scholars, entrepreneurs and managers receive a new conceptual framework to design lastingly viable business models on the basis of re-defined tools and concepts.

Leading texts on strategy and business development as well as CSR-driven texts on designing sustainable business models do not bridge the paradox of destructive wealth creation, i.e. the fact that individually rational and, in itself, highly successful economic behaviors lead, on the group level and the level of the whole system, to an outcome that by and large is highly destructive, as it places the social, ecological and economic sources of this wealth creation process in existential jeopardy. The paper proposes a new framework of economic reasoning for solving the paradoxes that shape current economic models and the shared value approach. It offers a first set of indicators, the parameters by which the shared value approach can be transformed into a living model for generating resource growth and added value creation cycles that stop the present downward spiral of acceleration, disruption, concentration and resource depletion. The paper thus presents forms of shared value creation that are more holistic and sustainable.

The purpose of this study is to examine the role of financial governance practices in influencing both financial management and Islamic work ethic practices to affect Islamic social enterprises (ISEs) accountability.

Questionnaires were administered to financial officers of 102 Malaysian ISEs. Data was analysed using Smart-PLS to examine the relationships between financial management, Islamic work ethic, financial governance and accountability.

Results of this study indicate direct relationship only exist between Islamic work ethic and accountability. The relationship between financial management and accountability are indirect through financial governance. Hence, the data proves that financial governance has a mediating role on both the relationships between financial management and Islamic work ethic with the accountability of the ISEs.

The study has highlighted the greater role of financial management, Islamic work ethic and financial governance practices over accountability to achieve public trust, especially for Malaysian ISEs.

ISEs need to have good financial governance practices besides financial management and Islamic work ethic practices to achieve good accountability.

The study contributes to the field of management and social accounting by providing empirical evidence on the ISEs practices specifically on financial management, Islamic work ethic, financial governance and accountability. This framework thus presents amongst the first attempts in studying accountability issues in ISEs.