The Moral Permissibility of Digital Nudging in the Workplace: Reconciling Justification and Legitimation

IF 3.4 2区 哲学 Q2 BUSINESS Business Ethics Quarterly Pub Date : 2023-04-14 DOI:10.1017/beq.2023.4
Rebecca C. Ruehle
{"title":"The Moral Permissibility of Digital Nudging in the Workplace: Reconciling Justification and Legitimation","authors":"Rebecca C. Ruehle","doi":"10.1017/beq.2023.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Organisations increasingly use digital nudges to influence their workforces’ behaviour without coercion or incentives. This can expose employees to arbitrary domination by infringing on their autonomy through manipulation and indoctrination. Nudges might furthermore give rise to the phenomenon of “organised immaturity.” Adopting a balanced approach between overly optimistic and dystopian standpoints, I propose a framework for determining the moral permissibility of digital nudging in the workplace. In this regard, I argue that not only should organisations provide pre-discursive justification of nudges but they should also ensure that employees can challenge their implementation whenever necessary through legitimation procedures. Building on Rainer Forst’s concept of the right to justification, this article offers a way to combine contract- and deliberation-based theories for addressing questions in business ethics. I further introduce the concept of meta-autonomy as a capacity that employees can acquire to counter threats of arbitrary domination and to mitigate organised immaturity.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2023.4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Organisations increasingly use digital nudges to influence their workforces’ behaviour without coercion or incentives. This can expose employees to arbitrary domination by infringing on their autonomy through manipulation and indoctrination. Nudges might furthermore give rise to the phenomenon of “organised immaturity.” Adopting a balanced approach between overly optimistic and dystopian standpoints, I propose a framework for determining the moral permissibility of digital nudging in the workplace. In this regard, I argue that not only should organisations provide pre-discursive justification of nudges but they should also ensure that employees can challenge their implementation whenever necessary through legitimation procedures. Building on Rainer Forst’s concept of the right to justification, this article offers a way to combine contract- and deliberation-based theories for addressing questions in business ethics. I further introduce the concept of meta-autonomy as a capacity that employees can acquire to counter threats of arbitrary domination and to mitigate organised immaturity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
职场数字化萌芽的道德许可:正当性与合法性的调和
组织越来越多地使用数字推动来影响员工的行为,而无需强制或激励。这可能会通过操纵和灌输侵犯员工的自主权,使他们受到任意支配。轻推可能进一步导致“有组织的不成熟”现象。在过度乐观和反乌托邦的立场之间采取平衡的方法,我提出了一个框架,用于确定工作场所数字轻推的道德容忍度。在这方面,我认为,组织不仅应该为轻推提供话语前的理由,而且还应该确保员工可以在必要时通过合法化程序对其实施提出质疑。本文以Rainer Forst的正当权利概念为基础,提出了一种结合契约理论和协商理论来解决商业伦理问题的方法。我进一步介绍了元自治的概念,作为员工可以获得的一种能力,以对抗任意统治的威胁,并减轻有组织的不成熟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes theoretical and empirical research relevant to the ethics of business. Since 1991 this multidisciplinary journal has published articles and reviews on a broad range of topics, including the internal ethics of business organizations, the role of business organizations in larger social, political and cultural frameworks, and the ethical quality of market-based societies and market-based relationships. It recognizes that contributions to the better understanding of business ethics can come from any quarter and therefore publishes scholarship rooted in the humanities, social sciences, and professional fields.
期刊最新文献
A Better Account of Constitutional Contractarianism Implies a Cooperative Form of Governance of the Sharing Economy: Critical Assessment of Hielscher, Everding, and Pies’ (2022) “Ordo-responsibility in the Sharing Economy: A Social Contracts Perspective” Corporate Responsibility and Repair for Anti-Black Racism The Free-Riding Issue in Contemporary Organizations: Lessons from the Common Good Perspective Business without Management: MacIntyrean Accounting, Management, and Practice-Led Business It’s a Three-Ring Circus: How Morally Educative Practices Are Undermined by Institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1