Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organizations as Human Communities and Internal Markets: Searching for Duality

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Business firms have been explained as internal markets or as communities. To be sustainable, however, they need to reconcile these two constituting elements that have mainly been touted as opposite and part of a dualistic relationship. We suggest that organizations may, in alternative, view market and community as part of a duality, interdependent and mutually constituting processes that may not only contradict each other but also enable one another. The implications of a duality view for business ethics, which articulates market and community elements in a fruitful, mutually enabling relationship, are considered, and duality is presented as a way of transcending what is commonly viewed as opposition, moving organizations both in the direction of humane and competitive finalities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The same type of problem, with the opposite sign, may occur, however, with organizations designed as markets: their pursuit of goals may blind them to the needs of the surrounding communities. This mind-set may partly explain the emergence of anti-corporate movements that see business forms as detached from their societal contexts.

References

  • Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science, 12, 215–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., & Hecksher, C. (2006). Towards collaborative community. In C. Hecksher & P. S. Adler (Eds.), The firm as a collaborative community (pp. 11–105). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alchian, A., & Damzets, H. (1972). Production, information costs, and economic organization. American Economic Review, 62(5), 777–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. (2012). A dual model of reciprocity in organizations. In K. Cameron & G. Spreitzer (Eds.), Handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 412–422). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. E., & Dutton, J. E. (2007). Enabling positive social capital in organizations. In J. E. Dutton & B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work (pp. 246–325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, J. N., & Pfeffer, J. (1994). The social psychology of organizations and inequality. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57, 190–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1992). The incentive effects of tournament compensation systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 336–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, M. (1999). The performance effects of pay dispersion on individuals and organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobko, P. (1985). Removing assumptions of bipolarity: Towards variation and circularity. Academy of Management Review, 10, 99–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borzaga, C., & Defourny, J. (2001). The emergence of social enterprise. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouch, G. W. (2008). FedEx freight: Putting people first. In E. D. Hess & K. S. Cameron (Eds.), Leading with values: Positivity, virtue, and high performance (pp. 29–54). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, H., Erickson, M., Stephenson, C., & Williams, S. (2000). Myths at work. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B. M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcomes and procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 189–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brower, H. H., Schoormanb, F. D., & Tan, H. H. (2000). A model of relational leadership: The integration of trust and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12, 198–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruch, H., & Ghoshal, S. (2003). Unleashing organizational energy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45, 45–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K., & Quinn, R. E. (1988). Organizational paradox and transformation. In R. Quinn & K. Cameron (Eds.), Paradox and transformation (pp. 1–18). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K., & Winn, B. (2012). Virtuousness in organizations. In K. S. Cameron & G. Spreitzer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship (pp. 231–243). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cappelli, P., Singh, H., Singh, J. V., & Useem, M. (2010). Leadership lessons from India. Harvard Business Review, 88, 90–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmeli, A., & Gittell, J. H. (2010). High-quality relationships, psychological safety, and learning from failures in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(6), 709–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1989). Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management. Cincinnati: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., & McGrath, R. G. (2001). Organizations unfettered: Organizational form in an information-intensive economy. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1135–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S. R., Cunha, J. V., & Cunha, M. P. (2002). Management paradoxes: A relational view. Human Relations, 55(5), 483–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4, 386–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard Business Review, 79, 67–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornforth, C. (2004). The governance of cooperatives and mutual associations: A paradox perspective. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 75(1), 11–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, E., & Ramus, T. (2012). The Italian Economia Aziendale and Catholic Social Teaching: How to Apply the Common Good Principle at the Managerial Level. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowherd, D. M., & Levine, D. I. (1992). Product quality and pay equity between lower-level employees and top management: An investigation of distributive justice theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 302–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha, M. P., Guimarães-Costa, N., Rego, A., & Clegg, S. R. (2010). Leading and following (un)ethically in Limen. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 189–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Aveni, R. A. (1994). Hyper-competition: Managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, M. (1959). Men who manage. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damon, W. (2004). The moral advantage. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dart, R. (2004). The legitimacy of social enterprise. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(4), 411–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Geus, A. (1997). The Living Company. Harvard Business Review, 75, 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 350–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (2000). Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, 25, 703–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farjoun, M. (2010). Beyond dualism: Stability and change as duality. Academy of Management Review, 35, 202–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, B. T., & Goethals, J. (2010). Using rivalry to spur innovation, McKinsey Quarterly , 1–12.

  • Ferraro, F., Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2005). Economics language and assumptions: How theories can become self-fulfilling. Academy of Management Review, 30, 8–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C. M. (1995). Thought worlds colliding: The role of contradiction in corporate innovation processes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19, 71–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J. (1993). Theories of the firm: Contractual and competence perspectives. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 3, 127–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J. P. G., & Klein, (2005). Entrepreneurship and the economic theory of the firm: Any gains from trade? In R. Agarwal, S. A. Alvarez, & O. Sorenson (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship: Disciplinary perspectives. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Martin, K., & Parmar, E. (2007). Stakeholder capitalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 303–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2001). Architectural innovations and modular corporate forms. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1229–1249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, D. A., Tahilyani, R. (2010). MindTree: A community of communities. Harvard Business School, Case 311-049.

  • George, J. M. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 191–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, W. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gittell, J. H., & Bamber, M. (2010). High- and low-road strategies for competing on costs and their implications for employment relations: International Studies in the Airline Industry. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 21, 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, G., Lee, J. C., & McCalman, D. G. (2005). Formula for catastrophe: Groupthink and groupshift. Business Review, 4(1), 44–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenspan, A. (2008). The age of turbulence: Adventures in a new world. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grey, C., & Carsten, C. (2001). Trust, control, and post-bureaucracy. Organization Studies, 22, 229–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halal, W. E. (1994). From hierarchy to enterprise: Internal markets as the new foundations of management. Academy of Management Executive, 8(4), 69–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield, E., & Sprecher, S. (1984). Equity theory and behavior in organizations. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 3, 95–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haveman, H. A., & Rao, H. (1997). Structuring a theory of moral sentiments: Institutional and organizational coevolution in the early thrift industry. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 1606–1651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J. (2006). Cooperation, punishment, and the evolution of human institutions. Science, 312, 60–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, N. (1997). Varieties of Altruism—And the common ground between them. Social Research, 64, 199–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, W. A. (1999). Dualism, duality and the complexity of economic institutions. International Journal of Social Economics, 26(4), 545–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, A. G., & Whyte, W. F. (1977). The Mondragon system of worker production cooperatives. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 31, 18–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., & Henderson, R. (2005). Inertia and incentives: Bridging organizational economics and organizational theory. Organization Science, 16, 509–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, K., & Bodinson, G. (2010). The power of people in achieving performance excellence. Journal for Quality and Participation, 33(2), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (1998). Procedural justice, strategic decision making, and the knowledge economy. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 323–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996). What do firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7, 502–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25, 760–776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, V., Samuels, S., & Ross, L. (2004). The name of the game: Predictive power or reputation vs. situational labels in determining Prisoner’s Dilemma game moves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1175–1185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. (2004). Human, social, and now positive psychological capital management: Investing in people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Main, B. G. M., O’Reilly, C., & Wade, J. (1993). Top executive pay: Tournament or teamwork? Journal of Labor Economics, 11, 606–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mainemelis, C. (2010). Stealing fire: Creative deviance in the evolution of new ideas. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 558–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational life. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschak, J. (1955). Elements of a theory of teams. Management Science, 1(1), 127–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshak, J., & Radner, R. (1972). The theory of teams. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruyama, M. (1982). Mindscapes, management, business policy, and public policy. Academy of Management Review, 7, 612–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melé, D. (2009). Business ethics in action. Seeking human excellence in organizations. London: Palgrave-MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review, 8, 193–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. P., & Herscovitch, L. (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Human Resource Management Review, 11, 299–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1990). The Icarus paradox: How exceptional companies bring about their own fall. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 1053–1060.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Mintzberg, H. (1983). The case for configuration. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research (pp. 57–73). Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (2009). Rebuilding companies as communities. Harvard Business Review, 87, 140–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitroff, I. I. (1983). Archetypal social systems analysis: On the deeper structure of human systems. Academy of Management Review, 8, 387–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitroff, I. I., & Mason, R. O. (1982). Business policy and metaphysics: Some philosophical considerations. Academy of Management Review, 7, 361–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mollering, G. (2005). The trust/control duality. International Sociology, 20, 283–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M., & Goff, S. (2010). Barclays two leading executives to give up 2009 cash bonuses. Financial Times, 13, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L. (1987). Minority influence correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 788–799.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, L. H. (2006). Permission to steal: Revealing the roots of corporate scandal. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’ Hear, A. (1997). Beyond evolution: Human nature and the limits of evolutionary explanation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, C., Main, B. G., & Crystal, G. (1988). CEO compensation as tournament and social comparison: Tale of two theories. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33, 257–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordóñez, L. D., Schweitzer, M. E., Galinsky, A. D., & Bazerman, M. (2009). Goals gone wild: The systematic side effects of overprescribing goal setting. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(1), 6–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(March), 125–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, dialectics and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist, 54, 291–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2006). Working alone: What ever happened to the idea of organizations as communities. In E. E. Lawler & J. O’Toole (Eds.), America at work: Choices and challenges (pp. 3–21). New York: Palgrave McMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2007). What were they thinking?. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2010). Building sustainable organizations: The human factor. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24, 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J. F. (1999). Putting people first for organizational success. Academy of Management Executive, 13(2), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, L., & Snyder, J. (2008). Ethical spillover in firms: Evidence from vehicle emissions testing. Management Science, 51, 1891–1903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirson, M., & Lawrence, P. R. (2010). Humanism in business: Towards a paradigm shift? Journal of Business Ethics, 93(4), 553–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, M. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management Journal, 23, 707–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, S. G., Underwood, L. G., Schloss, J. P., & Hurlbut, W. B. (Eds.). (2002). Altruism and altruistic love: Science, philosophy, and religion on dialogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quick, J. C. (1992). Crafting an organizational culture: Herb’s hand at Southwest Airlines. Organizational Dynamics, 21(2), 45–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., Cunha, M. P., & Clegg, S. (2012). The virtues of leadership. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V., & Koth, S. (2001). Continuous ‘morphing’: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form, and function. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1263–1280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. A. (1973). The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. American Economic Review, 63(2), 134–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations. Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutte, C. G. (2003). Social loafing in teams. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 361–378). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler-Smith, E. (2012). Before virtue: Biology, brain, behavior, and the moral sense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(2), 351–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandelands, L. (2009). The business of business is the human person: Lessons from the catholic social tradition. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 93–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segalla, D. (2010). Faith in firms: As low as you’d expect. Harvard Business Review, 88, 22–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sergiovanni, T. J. (1994). Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 214–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, D. (2007). From Hire to Liar. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. R. (1992). Linking groupthink to unethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(9), 651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36, 381–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E. (2002). The ABCs of Altruism. In S. G. Post, L. G. Underwood, J. P. Schloss, & W. B. Hurlbut (Eds.), Altruism and altruistic love: Science, philosophy, and religion on dialogue (pp. 17–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. I., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design form. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 685–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D., & MacMillan, I. C. (2010). Business models: Creating new markets and societal wealth. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 291–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K., Brown, M., & Hartman, L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: Perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Human Relations, 56, 5–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R. (1989). The psychology of procedural justice: A test of the group-value model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 830–838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. (1999). Linking community and spirit: A commentary and some propositions. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(4), 332–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welch, J., & Welch, S. (2006). Winning. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M., Moingeon, B., & Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010). Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 308–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zappa, G. (1927). Tendenze nuove negli studi di ragioneria, Opening Speech of the Academic Year 1926–1927 University of Venice.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nova School of Business and Economics, Nova SBE Campus de Campolide, 1099-032, Lisbon, Portugal

    Miguel Pina e Cunha, Arménio Rego & Antonino Vaccaro

  2. Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

    Miguel Pina e Cunha, Arménio Rego & Antonino Vaccaro

  3. UNIDE, ISCTE-IUL, Lisbon, Portugal

    Miguel Pina e Cunha, Arménio Rego & Antonino Vaccaro

  4. IESE, Barcelona, Spain

    Miguel Pina e Cunha, Arménio Rego & Antonino Vaccaro

Authors
  1. Miguel Pina e Cunha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arménio Rego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antonino Vaccaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Pina e Cunha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pina e Cunha, M., Rego, A. & Vaccaro, A. Organizations as Human Communities and Internal Markets: Searching for Duality. J Bus Ethics 120, 441–455 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1998-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1998-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation