Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 160, Issue 2, pp 319–337 | Cite as

Technological Unemployment, Meaning in Life, Purpose of Business, and the Future of Stakeholders

  • Tae Wan KimEmail author
  • Alan Scheller-Wolf
Original Paper

Abstract

We offer a precautionary account of why business managers should proactively rethink about what kinds of automation firms ought to implement, by exploring two challenges that automation will potentially pose. We engage the current debate concerning whether life without work opportunities will incur a meaning crisis, offering an argument in favor of the position that if technological unemployment occurs, the machine age may be a structurally limited condition for many without work opportunities to have or add meaning to their lives. We term this the axiological challenge. This challenge, if it turns out to be persuasive, leads to a second challenge, to which managers should pay special attention: the teleological challenge, a topic especially relevant to the broad literature about corporate purpose and governance. We argue that both the shareholder profit-maximization model and its major alternative, stakeholder theory, are insufficient to address the meaning crisis. Unless rebutted, the two challenges compel business leaders to proactively rethink the purpose of business for future society. Otherwise, businesses will be contributors to a major ethical crisis and societal externality in the coming society.

Keywords

Automation Meaning of work Stakeholder 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Ales, L., Cho, S.-H., & Körpeoglu, E. (2017). Optimal award scheme in innovation tournaments. Operations Research,65, 693–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alzola, M. (2012). The possibility of virtue. Business Ethics Quarterly,22, 377–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisors. (2016). Economic Report of the President: Transmitted to the Congress February 2016. Retrieved from http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/economic_reports/2016.pdf.
  4. Aristotle. (2006). Nichomachean ethics (R. Crisp, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Arneson, R. (1987). Meaningful work and market socialism. Ethics,97, 517–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arneson, R. (1990). Is work special? Justice and the redistribution of employment. American Political Science Review,84, 1127–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arneson, R. (2009). Meaningful work and market socialism revisited. Analysis & Kritik,31(139–151), 139.Google Scholar
  8. Arthur, W. B. (2011). The second economy. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-second-economy.
  9. Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives,29, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barry, B. (2000). Basic income and the work ethic. Boston Review. Retrieved from http://bostonreview.net/forum/basic-income-all/brian-barry-ubi-and-work-ethic.
  11. Bhargava, V., & Kim, T. W. (2017). Autonomous vehicles and moral uncertainty. In O. Lin, K. Abney, & R. Jenkins (Eds.), Robot Ethics 2.0: New challenges in philosophy, law, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Blair, M. M., & Stout, L. A. (1999). A team production theory of corporate law. Virginia Law Review,5, 247–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boatright, J. (1994). Fiduciary duties and the shareholder-management relation: Or, what’s so special about shareholders? Business Ethics Quarterly,4, 393–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowie, N. E. (1990). Empowering people as an end for business. In G. Enderle, B. Almond, & A. Argandoña (Eds.), People in corporations (pp. 105–112). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Breen, K. (2016). In defense of meaningful work as a public policy concern. In A. Fives & K. Breen (Eds.), Philosophy and political engagement: Reflection in the public sphere (pp. 139–161). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brennan, J. (2012). Libertarianism: What everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technology. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  18. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2015). Will humans go the way of horses? Labor and the second machine age. Foreign Affairs,94(4), 8–14.Google Scholar
  19. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2016). Human work in the robotic future: Policy for the Age of Automation. Foreign Affairs,95(4), 139–150.Google Scholar
  20. Chui, M., Manyika, J., & Miremadi, M. (2015). Four fundamentals of workplace automation. McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/four-fundamentals-of-workplace-automation.
  21. Ciulla, J. (2000). The working life: The promise and betrayal of modern work. New York: Three Rivers Press.Google Scholar
  22. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica,4, 386–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cunliffe, J., & Erreygers, G. (2003). Basic income? Basic capital! Origins and issues of a debate. Journal of Political Philosophy,11, 89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Danaher, J. (2017). Will life be worth living in a world without work? Technological unemployment and the meaning of life. Science and Engineering Ethics,23, 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davenport, T. H., & Kirby, J. (2016). Only humans need apply: Winners and losers in the age of smart machines. New York: Harper Business.Google Scholar
  26. Davidow, W. H., & Malone, M. S. (2014). What happens to society when robots replace workers? Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/12/what-happens-to-society-when-robots-replace-workers.
  27. Dodd, E. M., Jr. (1932). For whom are corporate managers trustees? Harvard Law Review,45, 1145–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Donaldson, T. (1994). When integration fails: The logic of prescription and description in business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly,4, 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Donaldson, T. (2012). The epistemic fault line in corporate governance. Academy of Management Review,37, 256–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Donaldson, T., & Walsh, J. P. (2015). Toward a theory of business. Research in Organizational Behavior,35, 181–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dunham, L., Freeman, R. E., & Liedtka, J. (2006). Enhancing stakeholder practice: A particularized exploration of community. Business Ethics Quarterly,16, 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In T. Beauchamp & N. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  33. Evers, D., & van Smeden, F. E. (2016). Meaning in life: In defense of the hybrid view. Southern Journal of Philosophy,54, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Finley, K. (2015). Robot radiologists will soon analyze your x-rays. Wired. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2015/10/robot-radiologists-are-going-to-start-analyzing-x-rays/.
  35. Floridi, L. (2014). Technological unemployment, leisure occupation, and the human project. Philosophy of Technology,27, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Frankish, K., & Ramsey, W. M. (Eds.). (2014). The Cambridge handbook of artificial intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.Google Scholar
  38. Freeman, R. E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly,4, 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Freeman, R. E. (2009). Managing for stakeholders. In T. L. Beauchamp & N. E. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical theory and business (8th ed., pp. 39–53). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  40. Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review,25, 88–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2013). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerization? Oxford: The Oxford Martin Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology (The University of Oxford).Google Scholar
  42. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  43. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1970/09/13/archives/a-friedman-doctrine-the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to.html?mcubz=1.
  44. Gheaus, A., & Herzog, L. (2016). The goods of work (other than money!). Journal of Social Philosophy,47, 70–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Grün, C., Hauser, W., & Rhein, T. (2010). Is any job better than no job? Life satisfaction and re-employment. Journal of Labor Research,31, 285–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hanson, K. O., & Weiss, S. (1991). Merck & Co., Inc. case series (A, B, C, D, video). Stanford, CA: Business Enterprise Trust.Google Scholar
  47. Hart, O., & Zingales, L. (2017). Companies should maximize shareholder welfare not market value. Journal of Law, Finance, and Accounting,2, 247–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hart, O., & Zingales, L. (unpublished manuscript). Should a company pursue a shareholder value?Google Scholar
  49. Hartman, E. (1996). Organizational ethics and the good life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Hayek, F. A. (1979). The political order of a free people. In Law, legislation, and liberty (Vol. 3) (1981). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Hooker, J. N., & Kim, T. (2018). Toward non-intuition-based machine ethics. In Proceedings of AAAI/ACM conference on artificial intelligence, ethics and society. http://www.aies-conference.com/accepted-papers.
  52. Hsieh, N.-h. (2008). Survey article: Justice in production. Journal of Political Philosophy, 16(1), 72–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hurka, T., & Suits, B. (1978). Introduction. In The grasshopper: Games, life, and utopia. Broadview Press.Google Scholar
  54. Hussain, W. (2018). The common good. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Google Scholar
  55. Ito, J., Dadich, S., & Obama, B. (2016). Barack Obama, neural nets, self-driving cars, and the future of the world. Retrieved from WIRED: https://www.wired.com/2016/10/president-obama-mit-joi-ito-interview.
  56. Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly,2, 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review,20, 404–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Jones, S. E. (2006). Against technology: From the Luddites to neo-liberalism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Jones, T. M., & Wicks, A. C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review,24, 206–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kauppinen, A. (2012). Meaningfulness and time. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research,2, 345–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kennedy, J. A., Kim, T., & Strudler, A. (2016). Hierarchies and dignity: A Confucian communitarian approach. Business Ethics Quarterly,26, 479–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Keynes, J. M. (1930). Economic possibilities for our grandchildren. In Essays in persuasion (pp. 358–373) (1963). New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
  63. Kim, T. W., & Donaldson, T. (2018). Rethinking right: Moral epistemology in management research. Journal of Business Ethics,148, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Korner, A., Reitzle, M., & Silbereisen, R. K. (2012). Work-related demands and life satisfaction: The effects of engagement and disengagement among employed and long-term unemployed people. Journal of Vocational Behavior,80, 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2004/2005). The division of lab. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Macey, J. R., & Miller, G. (1993). Corporate stakeholders: A contractual perspective. The University of Toronto Law Journal,43, 401–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Martin, K. (2016). Do privacy notices matter? Comparing the impact of violating formal privacy notices and informal privacy norms on consumer trust online. Journal of Legal Studies,45, 191–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McKee-Ryan, F. M., Song, Z., Wanberg, C. R., & Kinicki, A. J. (2005). Psychological and physical well-being during unemployment: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Applied Psychology,90, 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. McMahon, C. (2010). The public authority of the managers or private organizations. In G. G. Brenkert & T. L. Beauchamp (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of business ethics (pp. 100–125). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Metz, T. (2013). Meaning in life: An analytic study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Michaelson, C. (2005). Dialogue: Meaningful motivation and work motivation theory. Academy of Management Review,30, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Mitchell, T. R., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review,22, 853–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Moore, G. E. (1903/1993). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Moriarty, J. (2009). Rawls, self-respect, and the opportunity for meaningful work. Social Theory and Practice,35, 441–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Müller, V. C. (Ed.). (2016). Fundamentals issues of artificial intelligence. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  76. Murray, C. (2016). A guaranteed income for every American. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-guaranteed-income-for-every-american-1464969586.
  77. Nozick, R. (1968/1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  78. Orts, E. (2012). Business person: A legal theory of the firm. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  79. Orts, E. W., & Strudler, A. (2002). The ethical and environmental limits of stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly,12, 215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Orts, E., & Strudler, A. (2009). Putting a stake in stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics,88, 615–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Parmar, B. L., & Freeman, R. E. (2016). Ethics and the algorithm. MIT Sloan Management Review. Retrieved from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/ethics-and-the-algorithm/.
  82. Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 403–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Phillips, R. A. (1997). Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly,7, 51–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Phillips, R. A. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly,13, 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Phillips, R., & Freeman, R. E. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly,12, 331–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly,13, 479–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Remus, D., & Levy, F. S. (2017). Can robots be lawyers? Computers, lawyers, and the practice of law. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics,30, 501–558.Google Scholar
  88. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Russell, B. (1932). In the praise of idleness. Harper’s Magazine. Retrieved from https://harpers.org/archive/1932/10/in-praise-of-idleness/.
  90. Scanlon, T. M. (1998). What we owe to each other. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Schwartz, A. (1982). Meaningful work. Ethics,92, 634–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Sen, A. K. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Shankland, S. (2016). Microsoft translation app vaults over language barriers. CNET. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-translation-app-group-conversation-ai/.
  94. Simon, H. A. (1957). Authority. In E. D. Arensberg (Ed.), Research in industrial human relations (pp. 103–118). New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  95. Sison, A. J. (2015). Happiness and virtue ethics in business: The ultimate value proposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Smith, J. (Unpublished manuscript). On the market’s plurality of aims: Implications for corporate responsibility. The Zicklin Center Normative Business Ethics Workshop Series (presented on March 17 2017).Google Scholar
  97. Solomon, R. (1992a). Corporate roles, personal virtues: An Aristotelian approach to business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly,2, 317–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Solomon, R. (1992b). Ethics and excellence. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Stout, L. A. (2002). Bad and not-so-bad arguments for shareholder primacy. Southern California Law Review,75, 1189–1209.Google Scholar
  100. Stout, L. A. (2012). The problem of corporate purpose. Issues in Governance Studies,48, 1–12.Google Scholar
  101. Strudler, A. (2017). What to do with corporate wealth. Journal of Political Philosophy,25, 108–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Suits, B. (2005). The grasshopper: Games, life and utopia. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  103. Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. (2009). Innovation tournaments: Creating and selecting exceptional opportunities. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  104. Tomasi, J. (2001). Liberalism beyond justice: Citizens and the boundaries of political theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Ufberg, D. D. (2017). Business ethics in the age of robotics lecture features Wharton business professor. Miami Law News Articles. Google Scholar
  106. Van Parijs, P. (1992). Arguing for basic income. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  107. Van Parijs, P. (2004). Basic income: A simple and powerful idea for the twenty-first century. Politics and Society,32, 7–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Veltman, A. (2014). Meaningful work. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Walsh, A. C. (1994). Meaningful work as a distributive good. Southern Journal of Philosophy,32, 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wicks, A. C., & Freeman, R. E. (1998). Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics. Organization Science,9, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  112. Wolf, S. (1997a). Happiness and meaning: Two aspects of the good life. Social Philosophy and Policy,14, 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Wolf, S. (1997). Meaning and morality. Proceeds of the Aristotelian society, XCVII, 299–315.Google Scholar
  114. Wolf, S. (2007). The meanings of lives. In J. Perry, M. Bratman, & J. M. Fischer (Eds.), Introduction to philosophy (pp. 62–73). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Wolf, S. (2010). Meaning in life and why it matters. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Wolf, S. (2014). Happiness and meaning: A plurality of values rather than a conflict of norms. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,158, 18–24.Google Scholar
  117. World Bank. (2016). Digital Dividends. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2016.
  118. Yeoman, R. (2014). Meaningful work and workplace democracy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Zingales, L. (1998). Corporate governance. In P. Newman (Ed.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics and the law (pp. 497–502). London: MacMillan Reference Ltd.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tepper School of BusinessCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Ricahrd M. Cyert Professor of Operations Management, Tepper School of BusinessCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations