Ethics and Economic Success A Contradiction in Terms

IF 2 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Josef Wieland
{"title":"Ethics and Economic Success A Contradiction in Terms","authors":"Josef Wieland","doi":"10.1027/0044-3409/A000034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People in Germany might think you’re joking if you were to tell them that you study Business Ethics. Either Business, or Ethics. This basically sums up the deep-seated belief in European culture that business andmorals aremutually exclusive. Tipping the balance toward ethics means less economic efficiency, while an increase in business profits means less moral integrity. That is why in the Bible it is easier for a camel togo throughaneedle’s eye than for amanofwealth toget into the kingdom of God, why Plato devoted many pages of his dialog on The Republic to how to regulate the market, why for Aristotle, an economist is someone who lacks the telos of human existence, why Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica took nearly one hundred pages to explain how aneconomic trade canbe turned into a fair trade,why it is clear to Karl Marx that capitalism is the absolute embodiment of immorality, why for Max Weber there is no room for ethics within the iron bounds of competition and why, last but not least, the Nobel Prize winner, Milton Friedmann, can say that the only ethics of businesses is to increase profits. Those who are currently reflecting on the connection between business success and being ethical should not lose sight of the cultural standard just described, especially bearing in mind the realities of the economic situation we face today. Corruption, the effects of the financial crisis, and management criminality are just a few of those realities that are dominating the headlines. Emotionally churned-up debates about the greed and coldheartedness of the business world’s elite managers, about criminal and questionable management methods to the detriment of the owner, customer, and society, go hand in hand with scenarios that depict our decline in values, eliciting pleas for the return of the honorable businessman of the Middle Ages. The reputation and credibility of whole sectors and to a certain extent the market economy system itself is at stake. But as so often, appearances are deceptive. Generally speaking, there can be no economic success in moral anarchy. This has also been experienced in economic history and is apparently reflected in the recently developing cultural distrust for business. Unfortunately, science up to now has also been unable to provide clarity here. On a scientific level there is simply no clear and causal evidence that good ethics means good business. Results from studies carried out so far have not been methodologically conclusive due to an inconsistent definition of indicators: findings often turn out to be contradictory. However, insights currently gained by many companies indicate: a corporate strategy that is oriented toward values and implementing them at an operational level is an essential prerequisite today for economic success in modern and globally operating companies and their management. If the interplay of the economy and ethics were to be a success story it would consequently not result from a causal automatism but rather be a question of the morally sensible design of the governance structures of a company’s management. Here are a few empirical explanations for this apparently counterfactual belief. The economic scandals of the most recent past have shown that illegal and immoral behavior is a value-destroyer in the most direct sense of the word. A lack of values in management or the application of undesired values poses a risk to the existence of companies. It is a moral risk from behavior that should be an integral part of modern risk management and corporate governance. The US and British legal systems have drawn their consequences. They have set behavioral standards for the fulfillment of companies’ due diligence requirements and demand that value management systems be installed to ensure they are complied with. Compliance is worth it. Noncompliance means the organization and its representatives can incur massive risks. In this respect, character, credibility, and integrity are central leadership qualities and represent future topics to be encountered in manager training programs. However the impressionof the direction takenby theUSA and UK to strengthen business ethics is a rather bureaucratic one, and that is putting itmildly. Exculpation bywayof extensive documentation appears to be the logic behind the system: code of ethics, code of conduct, compliance officer, SOX, COSO framework, compliance program, integrity management, whistle blowing, ethics hotline – are just some of the Anglicisms that are rapidly proliferating at present and are not welcomed on all executive floors in the business world.","PeriodicalId":47289,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","volume":"46 1","pages":"243-245"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409/A000034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

People in Germany might think you’re joking if you were to tell them that you study Business Ethics. Either Business, or Ethics. This basically sums up the deep-seated belief in European culture that business andmorals aremutually exclusive. Tipping the balance toward ethics means less economic efficiency, while an increase in business profits means less moral integrity. That is why in the Bible it is easier for a camel togo throughaneedle’s eye than for amanofwealth toget into the kingdom of God, why Plato devoted many pages of his dialog on The Republic to how to regulate the market, why for Aristotle, an economist is someone who lacks the telos of human existence, why Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica took nearly one hundred pages to explain how aneconomic trade canbe turned into a fair trade,why it is clear to Karl Marx that capitalism is the absolute embodiment of immorality, why for Max Weber there is no room for ethics within the iron bounds of competition and why, last but not least, the Nobel Prize winner, Milton Friedmann, can say that the only ethics of businesses is to increase profits. Those who are currently reflecting on the connection between business success and being ethical should not lose sight of the cultural standard just described, especially bearing in mind the realities of the economic situation we face today. Corruption, the effects of the financial crisis, and management criminality are just a few of those realities that are dominating the headlines. Emotionally churned-up debates about the greed and coldheartedness of the business world’s elite managers, about criminal and questionable management methods to the detriment of the owner, customer, and society, go hand in hand with scenarios that depict our decline in values, eliciting pleas for the return of the honorable businessman of the Middle Ages. The reputation and credibility of whole sectors and to a certain extent the market economy system itself is at stake. But as so often, appearances are deceptive. Generally speaking, there can be no economic success in moral anarchy. This has also been experienced in economic history and is apparently reflected in the recently developing cultural distrust for business. Unfortunately, science up to now has also been unable to provide clarity here. On a scientific level there is simply no clear and causal evidence that good ethics means good business. Results from studies carried out so far have not been methodologically conclusive due to an inconsistent definition of indicators: findings often turn out to be contradictory. However, insights currently gained by many companies indicate: a corporate strategy that is oriented toward values and implementing them at an operational level is an essential prerequisite today for economic success in modern and globally operating companies and their management. If the interplay of the economy and ethics were to be a success story it would consequently not result from a causal automatism but rather be a question of the morally sensible design of the governance structures of a company’s management. Here are a few empirical explanations for this apparently counterfactual belief. The economic scandals of the most recent past have shown that illegal and immoral behavior is a value-destroyer in the most direct sense of the word. A lack of values in management or the application of undesired values poses a risk to the existence of companies. It is a moral risk from behavior that should be an integral part of modern risk management and corporate governance. The US and British legal systems have drawn their consequences. They have set behavioral standards for the fulfillment of companies’ due diligence requirements and demand that value management systems be installed to ensure they are complied with. Compliance is worth it. Noncompliance means the organization and its representatives can incur massive risks. In this respect, character, credibility, and integrity are central leadership qualities and represent future topics to be encountered in manager training programs. However the impressionof the direction takenby theUSA and UK to strengthen business ethics is a rather bureaucratic one, and that is putting itmildly. Exculpation bywayof extensive documentation appears to be the logic behind the system: code of ethics, code of conduct, compliance officer, SOX, COSO framework, compliance program, integrity management, whistle blowing, ethics hotline – are just some of the Anglicisms that are rapidly proliferating at present and are not welcomed on all executive floors in the business world.
伦理与经济成功:两个词的矛盾
如果你告诉德国人你学的是商业伦理,他们可能会认为你在开玩笑。要么是商业,要么是道德。这基本上概括了欧洲文化中根深蒂固的信念,即商业和道德是相互排斥的。将天平向道德倾斜意味着经济效率降低,而商业利润的增加意味着道德诚信的减少。这就是为什么在《圣经》中,骆驼穿过针眼比财富进入上帝的国度要容易,为什么柏拉图在《理想国》中花了很多页的对话来讨论如何规范市场,为什么对亚里士多德来说,经济学家是缺乏人类生存目标的人,为什么托马斯·阿奎那(Thomas Aquinas)在他的《神学大全》(Summa the)中花了将近一百页的篇幅来解释经济贸易是如何变成公平贸易的;为什么卡尔·马克思(Karl Marx)清楚地知道资本主义是不道德的绝对体现;为什么对马克斯·韦伯(Max Weber)来说,在竞争的铁边界内没有伦理的空间;为什么最后但并非最不重要的是,诺贝尔奖得主米尔顿·弗里德曼(Milton friedman)可以说,商业的唯一伦理是增加利润。那些目前正在思考商业成功和道德之间的联系的人不应该忽视刚才描述的文化标准,特别是考虑到我们今天面临的经济形势的现实。腐败、金融危机的影响和管理犯罪只是占据头条的现实中的一小部分。关于商界精英管理者的贪婪和冷酷,关于损害所有者、客户和社会的犯罪和有问题的管理方法的激烈争论,与描绘我们价值观下降的场景密切相关,引发了对中世纪光荣商人回归的呼吁。整个行业的声誉和信誉,在一定程度上,市场经济制度本身都受到威胁。但通常情况下,表象是具有欺骗性的。一般来说,在道德混乱中不可能有经济上的成功。这在经济史上也有过,并明显反映在最近发展起来的对企业的不信任文化上。不幸的是,到目前为止,科学也无法在这方面提供清晰的答案。在科学层面上,根本没有明确的因果证据表明良好的道德意味着良好的商业。由于对指标的定义不一致,迄今为止开展的研究的结果在方法上还没有结论性:结果往往是相互矛盾的。然而,许多公司目前获得的见解表明:以价值观为导向并在运营层面实施的公司战略是当今现代和全球运营公司及其管理取得经济成功的必要先决条件。如果经济和道德的相互作用是一个成功的故事,那么它就不是因果自动作用的结果,而是公司管理层治理结构的道德合理设计问题。以下是对这一明显违反事实的信念的一些实证解释。最近的经济丑闻表明,非法和不道德的行为是最直接意义上的价值破坏者。在管理中缺乏价值观或应用不受欢迎的价值观对公司的存在构成风险。它是一种来自行为的道德风险,应该成为现代风险管理和公司治理的组成部分。美国和英国的法律体系已经招致了它们的后果。他们制定了行为标准,以满足公司的尽职调查要求,并要求安装价值管理系统,以确保这些要求得到遵守。遵从是值得的。不合规意味着组织及其代表可能招致巨大的风险。在这方面,性格、信誉和正直是核心的领导品质,也是未来经理培训项目中要遇到的主题。然而,美国和英国在加强商业道德方面所采取的方向给人的印象是相当官僚的,这是委婉的说法。通过大量的文件来为自己开脱似乎是这个系统背后的逻辑:道德准则、行为准则、合规官、SOX、COSO框架、合规计划、诚信管理、举报、道德热线——这些都是目前正在迅速扩散的英式语言,并不是所有商界高管都欢迎的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology
Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie-Journal of Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
37
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信