Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Leadership in Economy of Communion Companies. Contribution to the Common Good through Innovation

  • Original research
  • Published:
Humanistic Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Innovation is strongly associated with survival and growth of all kind of organizations in a global competitive economy. Moreover, nowadays companies are increasingly questioned on how they deliver innovative solutions to deep-seated problems, such as poverty. Our research aims to understand how Economy of Communion (EoC) companies respond to this challenge by applying the logic of gratuitousness and giving. This paper examines the altruistic behaviour of EoC leaders and the connection with organizational innovation, necessary for firm’s survival in the long-term. We analyse these connections through a qualitative descriptive case study of three Spanish EoC companies. The findings reveal altruistic behaviours of leaders seeking the Common Good. Innovation derives from the desire to help others, such as employees and customers. Moreover, the findings reveal that a culture of dialogue among employees, managers and the whole organisation enhances risk-taking and, therefore, innovation The paper contributes to our understanding of how EoC companies are able to reconcile innovation with the ideal of altruism, distinctive of the Economy of Communion. We believe that this study opens up a wide range of future research opportunities on the antecedents of an innovative organizational culture.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The EoC company aims to meet three objectives: (1) creating new businesses, increasing and strengthening existing ones through productivity, employment and sustainable development, and supporting the State in helping the most vulnerable; (2) training employees and managers in the values of brotherhood and reciprocity with a special focus on the new generations and (3) helping the poor at local and global level, giving them assistance with basic needs in emergency situations (Baldarelli 2007; Argiolas 2014).

  2. http://www.edc-online.org/en/businesses/the-eoc-identification-card.html consulted on 04/09/2018

  3. http://www.edc-online.org/en/businesses/guidelines-for-conducting-a-business.html consulted on 04/09/2018

References

  • Adams, R., J. Bessant, and R. Phelps. 2006. Innovation management measurement: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews 8 (1): 21–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alegre, J., and R. Chiva. 2013. Linking entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The role of organizational learning capability and innovation performance. Journal of Small Business Management 51 (4): 491–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, T.M. 1998. How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review 76 (5): 76–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aragón-Correa, J.A., V.J. García-Morales, and E. Cordón-Pozo. 2007. Leadership and organizational learning's role on innovation and performance: Lessons from Spain. Industrial Marketing Management 36 (3): 349–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argandoña, A. 2011. Review of new financial horizons: The emergence of an economy of communion by Lorna Gold. Journal of Markets & Morality 14 (1).

  • Argiolas, G. 2014. Il valore Dei valori. Roma: Città Nuova.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avolio, B.J., and W.L. Gardner. 2005. Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 16 (3): 315–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldarelli, M.G. 2007. I poli industriali dell’Economia di Comunione (EdC) in una prospettiva economico-aziendale: Nuove sfide nelle aggregazioni tra aziende e rivitalizzazione del rapporto fiduciario con il sistema creditizio. Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia aziendale 3: 178–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbuto Jr, J. E., and D.W. Wheeler. 2006. Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3), 300–326.

  • Baregheh, A., J. Rowley, and S. Sambrook. 2009. Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision 47 (8): 1323–1339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C.D. 1991. The altruism question: Towards a social-psychological answer. New Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, M.J., and M. Tushman. 2002. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries. Administrative Science Quarterly 47: 676–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, M.J., and M. Tushman. 2003. Exploitation, exploration and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review 28: 238–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernacchio, C., and R. Couch. 2015. The virtue of participatory governance: A MacIntyrean alternative to shareholder maximization. Business Ethics: A European Review 24: S130–S143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessant, J., R. Lamming, H. Noke, and W. Phillips. 2005. Managing innovation beyond the steady state. Technovation 25 (12): 1366–1376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blasco, A.E., M. Gil-Marques, and J.S. Bolufer. 2018. The economy of communion as a social innovation to humanise business. In Strategies and best practices in social innovation, 89–103. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, C. 2007. Assessing recent developments in innovation measurement: The third edition of the Oslo manual. Science and Public Policy 34 (1): 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M.E., L.K. Trevino, and D.A. Harrison. 2005. Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 97: 117–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. E., and L. K. Treviño. 2006. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616.

  • Bruni, L., and T. Héjj. 2011. The economy of communion. In Handbook of spirituality and business, 378–386. UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruni, L., and A.J. Uelmen. 2006. Religious values and corporate decision making: The economy of communion project. Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law 11: 645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassell, C. 2004. In Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research, ed. G. Symon. Sage.

  • Chang, Y., H. Chang, H. Chi, M. Chen, and L. Deng. 2012. How do established firms improve radical innovation performance? The organizational capabilities view. Technovation 32: 441–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, S. 1996. The case study method for research in small-and medium-sized firms. International Small Business Journal 15 (1): 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H., and V. Pucik. 2005. Relationship between innovativeness, quality, growth, profitability and market value. Strategic Management Journal 26: 555–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, M.C. 1997. The Innovator’s dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciulla, J.B. 2005. The state of leadership ethics and the work that lies before us. Business Ethics: A European Review 14 (4): 323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui, J., and H. Jo. 2018. Pray local and act global? Christian religiosity in the US and human rights. Business Ethics: A European Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. 1991. Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal 34 (3): 555–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, P., and L. Daniel. 2010. Understanding social innovation: A provisional framework. International Journal of Technology Management 51 (1): 9–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Del Baldo, M., and M.G. Baldarelli. 2015. From weak to strong CSR: The experience of the EoC (Economy of communion) industrial parks in Germany and Italy. uwf. UmweltWirtschaftsForum 23 (4): 213–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewar, R.D., and J.E. Dutton. 1986. The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis. Management Science 32 (11): 1422–1433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierksmeier, C. 2011. The freedom–responsibility nexus in management philosophy and business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 101 (2): 263–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierksmeier, C. 2016. What is ‘Humanistic’ about humanistic management? Humanistic Management Journal 1 (1): 9–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinh, J.E., R.G. Lord, W.L. Gardner, J.D. Meuser, R.C. Liden, and J. Hu. 2014. Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly 25 (1): 36–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domínguez Escrig, E., F. Mallén, R. Chiva, and R. Lapiedra. 2016. How does altruistic leader behavior foster radical innovation? The mediating effect of organizational learning capability. Leadership & Organization Development Journal 37 (8): 1056–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., and J.P. Walsh. 2015. Toward a theory of business. Research in Organizational Behaviour 35: 181–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N. 1986. Altruistic emotion, cognition, and behaviour. London: Arizona State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N.E., and P.A. Miller. 1987. Empathy, sympathy, and altruism: Empirical and conceptual links. In Empathy and its development, ed. N. Eisenberg and J. Strayer, 292–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14 (4): 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. 1990. Selfishness and altruism. In Beyond self-interest, ed. J. Mansbridge, 44–52. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escrig, E.D., F.F.M. Broch, R.C. Gómez, and R.L. Alcamí. 2016. How does altruistic leader behavior foster radical innovation? The mediating effect of organizational learning capability. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

  • Ettlie, J.E., and E.M. Reza. 1992. Organizational integration and process innovation. Academy of Management Journal 35 (4): 795–827.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, Y., A. Van Rossem, and M. Buelens. 2011. Small-business owner-managers’ perceptions of business ethics and CSR-related concepts. Journal of Business Ethics 98 (3): 425–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1970. The corporate social responsibility is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, September, 13, 122–6.

  • Fry, L. 2003. Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 14 (6): 693–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gault, F. 2018. Defining and measuring innovation in all sectors of the economy. Research Policy 47 (3): 617–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Marques, M., and M.D. Moreno-Luzon. 2013. Driving human resources towards quality and innovation in a highly competitive environment. International Journal of Manpower 34 (8): 839–860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, L. 2003. The roots of the Focolare movement’s economic ethic. Journal of Markets and Morality 6 (1).

  • Green, S.G., M.B. Gavin, and L. Aiman-Smith. 1995. Assessing a multidimensional measure of radical technological innovation. Engineering Management 43 (3): 203–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenleaf, R.K. 2002. Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.

  • Grusec, J.E., and E. Redler. 1980. Attribution, reinforcement, and altruism: A developmental analysis. Developmental Psychology 16 (5): 525–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinot, J., R. Chiva, and F. Mallén. 2015. Altruismo y capacidad de aprendizaje organizativo: Un estudio en las empresas mejor valoradas por los trabajadores en España. Universia Business Review 45: 92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gummesson, E. 2000. Qualitative methods in management research. Sage.

  • Hage, J., and R. Dewar. 1973. Elite values versus organizational structure in predicting innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 18 (3): 279–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, A., T. Tomczak, and R. Befurt. 2006. Determinants of radical product innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management 9 (1): 20–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R.J., and R.N. Aditya. 1997. The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis? Journal of Management 23 (3): 409–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, J.P., F.A.J. Van den Bosch, and H.W. Volberda. 2006. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science 52 (11): 1661–1674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jencks, C. 1990. “Varieties of altruism”, Beyond Self-Interest, 53–67. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T.D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 602–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • John XXIII (1961). Mater Et Magistra [Encyclical letter]. Retrieved from http://www.vatican.va/content/john-xxiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_j-xxiii_enc_15051961_mater.html.

  • Johnson, C. 2001. Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, R.L., and C.F. Cannell. 1957. The dynamics of interviewing. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. 2000. Human nature and environmentally responsible behaviour. Journal of Social Issues 56 (3): 491–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, M. R., and M.E. Porter 2006. Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84/12 (December 2006): 78–92;

  • Kramer, M.R., and M.E. Porter. 2011. Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review 89 (1/2): 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepoutre, J., and A. Heene. 2006. Investigating the impact of firm size on small business social responsibility: A critical review. Journal of Business Ethics 67 (3): 257–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linard, K.T. 2003. Economy of communion: Systemic factors in the rise of a new entrepreneurship. Systems Research and Behavioural Science 20 (2): 163–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linton, J.D. 2009. De-babelizing the language of innovation. Technovation. 29: 729–737.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, K.J., Z.L. Martínez, and L.B. Specht. 2013. The economy of communion model a spirituality-based view of global sustainability and its application to management education. Journal of Management for Global Sustainability 1 (1): 71–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubich, C. 1999. The economy of communion experience: A proposal for economic activity from the spirituality of unity. Address to Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 31 May 1999.

  • Maidique, M.A., and B.J. Zirger. 1985. The new product learning cycle. Research Policy 14 (6): 299–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallén, F., R. Chiva, J. Alegre, and J. Guinot. 2015. Are altruistic leaders worthy? The role of organizational learning capability. International Journal of Manpower 36 (3): 271–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J., and Walsh. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48 (2): 268–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melé, D. 2014. Human quality treatment: Five organizational levels. Journal of Business Ethics 120 (4): 457–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melé, D., and C. Dierksmeier. 2012. Human development in business: Values and humanistic management in the encyclical Caritas in Veritate, 21–44. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M.B., and A.M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Second ed. Sage: Thousand Oaks.

  • Moreno-Luzon, M.D., M. Gil-Marques, and J. Vall-Pasola. 2013. TQM, innovation and the role of cultural change. Industrial Management & Data Systems.

  • Noor, K. B. M. 2008. Case study: A strategic research methodology. American Journal of Applied Sciences 5 (11): 1602–1604.

  • OECD-EUROSTAT 2005. The measurement of scientific and technological activities. Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological data. Oslo manual. Paris, OECD.

  • Oliner, S.P. 1992. Altruistic personality: Rescuers of Jews in Nazi Europe. Simon and Schuster.

  • Salas-Vallina, A., and J. Alegre 2018. Unselfish leaders? Understanding the role of altruistic leadership and organizational learning on happiness at work (HAW). Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

  • Salas-Vallina, A., A. Ferrer-Franco, and R. Fernandez Guerrero. 2018. Altruistic leadership and affiliative humor’s role on service innovation: Lessons from Spanish public hospitals. The International Journal of Health Planning and Management 33 (3): e861–e872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sastry, M.A. 1999. Managing strategic innovation and change. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (2): 420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J.A. 1942. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. 1990. The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siedel, J., and U. Kelle. 1995. Different functions of coding in the analysis of textual data. In Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods and practice, ed. U. Kelle. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, R.G. 1991. Presidential address on altruism and sociology. The Sociological Quarterly 32 (1): 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, originally published by W. Straman and T. Cadell, in the Strand.

  • Tidd, J., and J.R. Bessant. 2018. Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Wiley.

  • Utterback, J.M. 1994. Radical innovation and corporate regeneration. Research Technology Management 37 (4): 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A.H. 1986. Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science 32 (5): 590–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dierendonck, D. 2011. Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management 37 (4): 1228–1261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, S.L., and M.C. Rush. 2000. Altruistic organizational citizenship behaviour: Context disposition, and age. Journal of Social Psychology 140 (3): 379–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, M.A., Borrill, C.S., Dawson, J.F., Brodbeck, F., Shapiro, D.A., and B. Haward. 2003. Leadership clarity and team innovation in health care. The Leadership Quarterly 14 (4–5):393–410.

  • Yen, H.R., and B.P. Niehoff. 2004. Organizational citizenship behaviours and organizational effectiveness: Examining relationships in Taiwanese banks. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 34 (8): 1617–1637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. 1994. Discovering the future of the case study method in evaluation research. Evaluation Practice 15 (3):283–290

  • Yin, R. K. 1989. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage publications.

  • Yin, R.K. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaabi, H.H.J.A., S.K. Singh, and M.M. Ajmal. 2017. Role of organisational commitment, culture and leadership in managing innovation: A study. International Journal of Value Chain Management 8 (3): 270–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamagni, S. 2014. The economy of communion project as a challenge to standard economic theory. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia: 44–60.

Download references

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge the support provided through the Management and Human Resources 2017/18–238 Research Grant, awarded by the Universidad Católica de Valencia “San Vicente Mártir”; the support from the Spanish EoC Association, and from the three companies that participated in the research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Business, Catholic University of Valencia, Calle Corona 34, E-46003, Valencia, Spain

    Ma Asunción Esteso-Blasco, María Gil-Marqués & Juan Sapena

Authors
  1. Ma Asunción Esteso-Blasco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. María Gil-Marqués
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juan Sapena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Sapena.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. EoC Guidelines. Source: Lopez et al. (2013)

Principle 1

Business Leaders and Workers

A participative environment is encouraged.

Capital investment decisions favour job creations initiatives.

The human person, not capital, remains at the centre of the business.

Employees are provided competitive benefits packages and help in times of hardship

Principle 2

Relationship with customers, suppliers, the public, and others outside the company

The most modern means available are used in order to offer customers useful quality goods and services at fair prices.

Relationships with suppliers, customers, and public administrators are based on mutual respect and trust.

The true value of one’s goods and services are presented without negative portrayals of the competition.

“Relationship capital” is regarded as important for stable and resilient economic growth.

Principle 3

Ethics

Personal growth.

Compliance with laws and ethical dealings with tax authorities, regulators and labour unions.

Legal and ethical behaviour towards employees.

The wellbeing of customers is considered when establishing quality standards of products.

Principle 4

Quality of Life & Production

The quality of interpersonal relationships within the organization is important; the goal is to become community.

Health and well-being are important—provisions are made for those with special needs.

Working conditions are appropriate for the type of business

Excessive hours/days of work are avoided; vacations are provided.

Safe and environmentally friendly products are produced.

Principle 5

Harmony in the Working Environment

Mutual respect and trust are promoted.

Teamwork and personal development are fostered.

Clean, orderly environments are maintained.

Principle 6

Training and Education

Personnel selection criteria and professional development programs foster mutual support and the sharing of talents and ideas.

Opportunities are provided for continuous learning to enable individuals to achieve personal and corporate objectives.

Principle 7

Communications

Open and honest communications are fostered; input is valued.

“Culture of giving” principles are shared.

Communication among EoC participants is maintained at local and international levels.

Appendix 2 Case Study Protocol

  1. 1.

    Introduction to the Research Topic

In this research we are interested in deepening in the altruistic behaviours of EoC leaders in such organisations. Specifically, the connections with innovation.

  1. 2.

    Characteristics of the Cases to Be Selected and the Selection Process

Three representative companies of the EoC with a long history of involvement in the project will participate in this study. Their general managers will be contacted to find out if they are willing and interested in participating in the study.

  1. 3.

    Material Collection Procedures

Interviews: The general manager and two other subordinates will be interviewed, preferably if they are middle managers. The interviews will last approximately one hour and will be structured by means of a general guide, although it will always be encouraged that the interviewee can add any topic of interest not included in the guide. If possible, and provided that the interviewee agrees, the interviews will be recorded.

Documentation:

We will collect additional documentation to expand on the information obtained in the interviews, so we will consult the company’s website, documents that reflect their adherence to the EoC project as well as organization charts or projects they are currently carrying out that reflect innovation and their performance.

Treatment of the information.

With the information collected, he will build a case study. In any case, permission will be requested to use the company’s identity in the publications of the research results.

  1. 4.

    Topics to Be Covered in the Interviews

  2. 4.1

    EoC

  • How they decide to take the approach?

  • How the EoC principles are lived in the company?

  1. 4.2

    Altruistic Behaviour

  • How altruism is understood and put into practice?

  • What specific aspects/facts/attitudes of altruistic behaviour?

  • Is this behaviour shared among the people in the organisation?

  • Is this behaviour shared with suppliers, clients, institutions, competition...?

  • What specific consequences may altruism have on the company?

  1. 4.3

    Innovation

Considering the last 3 years.

  • Market launch of completely new products?

  • Market launch of substantially improved products?

  • Complete redesign of processes?

  • Incremental process improvement?

  • Incorporation of new knowledge and technologies into the company?

  • Improvement of the existing technologies and knowledge in the company?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Esteso-Blasco, M.A., Gil-Marqués, M. & Sapena, J. Leadership in Economy of Communion Companies. Contribution to the Common Good through Innovation. Humanist Manag J 6, 77–101 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41463-020-00095-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41463-020-00095-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation