Advertisement

Humanistic Management in the Corporation: From Self-Interest to Dignity and Well-being

  • Ricardo AguadoEmail author
  • José Luis Retolaza
Chapter
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

Society as a whole and its individual stakeholders are asking corporations a change in the way they approach business, economic activity, and human beings (Dierksmeier, 2011). This demand is felt strongly in countries where the impact of the 2008–2014 economic crisis has been deeper and long lasting (Aguado, Alcaniz, Retolaza, & Albareda, 2016). At the academic level, authors from different backgrounds have made a call in order to align the interests of corporations and social well-being (Melé & Schlag, 2015). In some cases, this call tries to reconcile profit with the generation of value for stakeholders and the environmental responsibility (Porter & Kramer, 2011). In other cases, authors proposed firms to engage in community development activities (Donaldson, 2017). In this chapter, we will show how it is possible for corporations to align the interest of stakeholders and society as a whole with the aims and objectives of the corporation. Following this path, corporations could make a positive contribution to social well-being and to the dignity of the individuals engaged in their economic activities.

References

  1. Aguado, R., Alcaniz, L., & Retolaza, J. L. (2015). A new role for the firm incorporating sustainability and human dignity. Conceptualization and measurement. Human Systems Management, 34(1), 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguado, R., Alcaniz, L., Retolaza, J. L., & Albareda, L. (2016). Jesuit business education model: In search of a new role for the firm based on sustainability and dignity. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 11(1), 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aguado, R., Retolaza, J. L., & Alcaniz, L. (2017). Dignity at the level of the firm: Beyond the stakeholder approach. In M. Kostera & M. Pirson (Eds.), Dignity and the organization (pp. 81–98). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 142–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alford, H. (2006). Stakeholder theory. The good company: Catholic social thought and corporate social responsibility in dialogue. Pontifical University of St Thomas, Rome. Plenary Session, Saturday October 7. Accessed July 21, 2018, from http://www.oikonomia.it/images/immagini_X_Articoli/2007/2007_giugno/pdf/05_studi_Helen%20alford.pdf
  6. Alford, H. (2010). The personal wisdom of personalism. Journal of Management Development, 29(8), 697–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Argandona, A. (2011). Beyond contracts. Love in firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 99, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baviera, T., English, W., & Guillén, M. (2016). The logic of the gift: Inspiring behaviour in organizations beyond the limits of duty and exchange. Business Ethics Quarterly, 26(2), 159–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benkler, Y. (2011, July/August). The unselfish gene. Harvard Business Review, 89(7–8), 67–75.Google Scholar
  11. Deloitte. (2014). The 2014 global report. Accessed September 3, 2018, from https://www2.deloitte.com/gz/en/pages/about-deloitte/topics/global-report-2014.html
  12. Dierksmeier, C. (2011). Reorienting management education: From the Homo economicus to human dignity. Humanistic Management Network, research paper series no. 13-05. Accessed July 2, 2018, from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1766183 or  https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1766183
  13. Donaldson, T. (2017). Donaldsonian themes: A commentary. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(1), 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellsworth, R. (2002). Leading with purpose. The new corporate realities. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fagley, N. S., & Adler, M. G. (2012). Appreciation: A spiritual path to find value and meaning in the workplace. Journal of Management, Spirituality, and Religion, 9(2), 167–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Folger, R., & Salvador, R. (2008). Is management theory too “Self-ish”? Journal of Management, 34(6), 1127–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frank, R. (2005). Microeconomics and behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  18. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.Google Scholar
  19. Freeman, E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Freeman, E., & Ginena, K. (2015). Rethinking the purpose of the corporation. Notizie di Politeia, 31(117), 9–18.Google Scholar
  21. Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Friedman, M. (2007). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In W. C. Zimmerli, M. Holzinger, & K. Richter (Eds.), Corporate ethics and corporate governance (pp. 173–178). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1), 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Goodpaster, K. E., Maines, T. D., Naughton, M., & Shapiro, B. (2018). Using UNPRME to teach, research, and enact business ethics: Insights from the Catholic identity matrix for business schools. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(4), 761–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grant, A. M. (2012). Leading with meaning: Beneficiary contact, prosocial impact, and the performance effects of transformational leadership. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 458–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Guillén, M., Ferrero, I., & Hoffman, M. (2015). The neglected ethical and spiritual motivations in the workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, 128, 803–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 46, 53–62.Google Scholar
  29. Hollensbe, E., Wookey, C., Loughlin, H., & George, C. (2014). From the editors. Organizations with purpose. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1227–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kanbur, R., & Spence, M. (2010). Equity and growth in a globalizing world. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed July 5, 2018, from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2458
  32. Karakas, F. (2010). Spirituality and performance in organizations: A literature review. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kostera, M., & Pirson, M. (2017). Dignity and the organization. Humanism in business series. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maslow, A. (1943). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  35. McClelland, D. C. (1962). Business, drive and national achievement. Harvard Business Review, 40, 99–112.Google Scholar
  36. Melé, D. (2003). The challenge of humanistic management. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(1), 77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Melé, D., & Dierskmeier, C. (2012). Values and humanistic management in the encyclical ‘Caritas in Veritate’. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. Melé, D., & Schlag, M. (Eds.). (2015). Humanism in economics and business. Perspectives of the Catholic social tradition. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Naughton, M. (2015). Thinking institutionally about business: Seeing its nature as a community of persons and its purpose as the common good. In D. Melé & M. Schlag (Eds.), Humanism in economics and business. Perspectives of the Catholic social tradition (pp. 179–199). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. OECD. (2014). Better life index 2014: Definitions and metadata. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pirson, M. (2014). Reconnecting management theory and social welfare: A humanistic perspective. Academy of Management proceedings, annual conference of the Academy of Management 2014.Google Scholar
  42. Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.Google Scholar
  43. Retolaza, J. L., San-Jose, L., & Ruíz-Roqueñi, M. (2016). Social accounting for sustainability: Monetizing the social value. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sen, A. K. (1997). On ethics and economics. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  45. Smith, A. (1759). The theory of moral sentiments. London: A. Millar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London: Strahan and Cadell.Google Scholar
  47. Wheeler, A., & Elkington, J. (2001). The end of the corporate environmental report? Or the advent of cybernetic sustainability reporting and communication. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(Jan/Feb), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Deusto, Deusto Business SchoolBilbaoSpain

Personalised recommendations