According to Socrates – ancient philosopher and recurring figure in Plato’s works – when someone does something wrong, the dispute is never really about whether or not it was wrong. What we quibble over is whether there are mitigating circumstances to justify it. Face it. For a wide range of actions, deciding right or wrong, good or bad, is an easy call. Shoot the person behind you in a movie theater for talking too loudly (a completely real incident)? Bad. Help a pregnant woman carry groceries? Good. Dump your unwanted, aging pet in the desert to fend for itself? Bad. Slaughter the groom and all his relatives at your daughter’s wedding party? Very, very bad. Read QCBN’s business book review every month? Very good.
Nevertheless, these days, bad behavior gives the impression of being much more normal than good behavior, particularly in the business world where bad behavior even appears to rule. No matter that the perception doesn’t really bear out (there are many, many good, ethical people in business, too). But, perception is its own kind of reality, according to Gabriel Abend, author of “The Moral Background: An Inquiry in the History of Business Ethics.” In his introductory chapter, he poses an important question regarding the many significant economic and business fiascos of past decades: is morality a causal factor?
To be a causal factor means that morality (or lack of it, in this case) would have to be the primary, or single, cause of such scandalous disasters as Enron, Tyco, WorldCom and others. Business school teaching practices are also implicated in laying blame at morality’s feet. When it comes to causality (and morality), however, the story is more complicated than that. The mere fact that business ethics is on many people’s minds these days signals how important we believe it to be. Quoting business guru Peter Drucker, Abend notes that “business ethics” is “rapidly becoming the ‘in’ subject” taking the place of yesterday’s “social responsibilities.”
Abend’s focus is the history of business ethics, and on business ethicists in particular. Business ethicist is a term that refers to a wide range of people who concern themselves with “improving the ethics of business” in various capacities. They include ministers, journalists, pundits, politicians, professors, public intellectuals and even business people who engage in questions of ethics (but not those who engage in questionable ethics). “Our historical knowledge about business ethics,” he writes, “has long been woefully inadequate.” In fact, “many of today’s business ethic debates and many of today’s solutions were already debated and already proposed one hundred years ago or so.” The book is intended as one remedy: The author offers a framework for the scientific study of morality.
Rather than an intimidating, unreadable work, what Abend provides is an interesting historical account. While he sprinkles in scientific and philosophical terms (some even in German – Denkkollectiven, for example), he also provides explanations and translations (“thought collectives” – in case you flunked the semester on philosophical German). Readers who prefer more digestible tidbits will enjoy the quotes heading each chapter that provide enough history and anecdotes to fuel both serious reflection and watercooler debates. A more thorough reading offers consideration of the structure of American society from roughly the 1850s to the 1930s through an understanding of how “business” developed as an “agent.” In other words, Abend looks at business as a force in society capable of choices and action, good and bad. He looks at how business ethics emerged within this period; for example, the emergence and prominence of codes of business ethics in the 1920s, including by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He traces the way in which such formal codes “make and express business ethics claims and demands,” and even how they present themselves – posted on a wall in an office, offered as a document an employee has to sign, and the like – and why it all matters.
In the case of bad behavior, in and out of business, it’s easy to cast blame, but harder to see whether it’s been cast in the right direction. Abend’s history and framework are a needed addition even if history, in the case of bad business behavior, tends to repeat itself. QCBN
By Constance DeVereaux
Quad Cities Business News
Leave a Reply