Philosophy of Management最新文献

This editorial is a report on the ‘philosophical methods’ workshop we ran at the 2024 Academy of Management conference in Chicago.

Elizabeth Anderson claims that the prevailing culture of business is one of domination. “Most workplace governments in the United States are dictatorships, in which bosses. . don’t merely govern workers; they dominate them” (2017, p. xxii; italics in the original). If this diagnosis is correct, then the culture of business poses a significant threat to human liberty, as each year millions of people in the employ of businesses spend hundreds or thousands of hours on the job. This essay provides a further argument supporting Anderson’s analysis, by extending her treatment of Adam Smith and drawing on his claim about the potentially mind-numbing effects on workers of extreme division of labor. Smith’s analysis, though consistent with Anderson’s, implies that the problem is more worrisome than she allows, and accordingly that Anderson’s own remedy might be insufficient. Our Anderson/Smith argument suggests that worker unfreedom might warrant more aggressive institutional remedy.

This inquiry aims to highlight the philosophical perspective of Aristotle’s “business” priority of the organization over the individual in combination with Heraclitus’ flux theory and the unity of opposites to alternatively approach organizational resilience. While current literature on organizational resilience argues that disorganization and gradual decaying are probable but not certain, they can be predicted and managed. In contrast, the combined analysis of Aristotelian and Heraclitean philosophical theories points out that organizational disorganization and the fluctuation of resilience are a certainty and not a probability, constituting an automation embedded in a circular, repeatable pattern for organizations and businesses. In this project, organizational and entrepreneurial scientific realism meets with the philosophical synthesis of Heraclitus’ and Aristotle’s thought on organizational resilience. The intended outcome of this “encounter” is to contribute an applicable perceptual “intellectual tool” that will foster a deeper understanding of resilience, organizationally and individually.

This paper explores the evolution of cooperative societies through the lens of Gilbert Simondon's cybernetic process philosophy, emphasizing the preservation of cooperative identity. Cooperative societies, which promote values such as equality and solidarity, face challenges in maintaining their identity amidst technological advancements and changing socio-economic conditions. Traditional theories of organisational identity, which focus on centrality, distinctness, and continuity, fall short in addressing the dynamic nature of cooperative evolution.

Simondon's philosophy offers a robust framework for understanding these transformations. Key concepts like the associated milieu, metastability, and transduction are applied to analyse the genealogical development of cooperative societies. Findings suggest that cooperative identity is not static but evolves with technological integration, co-evolving with their environment and governance models. This interdependence highlights the crucial role of technology in shaping cooperative structures and behaviours.

The study contributes to management theory by providing a nuanced perspective on organisational identity and its evolution. It underscores the importance of understanding the dynamic interplay between technology and cooperative values. By integrating Simondon's philosophical insights with cybernetic principles, this research offers a comprehensive view of how cooperative societies adapt and thrive in a technologically driven world.

Claiming that citizens have a “right to free speech” signals to those in free and democratic societies that speech is a freedom that should be protected. Claiming this right, however, does not explain the limits of that right, such as who can speak and what they can and cannot say within organizations. Unlike other articles that describe the legal limits of speech rights, I provide an account of how speech rights can be ethically justified inside and outside of organizations. I first make three assumptions about how strong common interests in speaking and owning things eventually became moral rights and then legal rights within free societies. I also explain how an organization’s property rights and right to make and dissolve contracts can justify managers in limiting free speech. Using principles from rights, fairness, and justice, I further describe when managers should and should not limit speech based on organizational roles and speech content. In some cases, employees could argue that speech limits are unfair if employees in similar circumstances are not allowed to speak on similar topics. I conclude by analyzing whistleblowing as employee speech that managers may try to limit using property rights or consequentialist arguments, but that society protects as a requirement of justice.

Those who find their work meaningful often need to be more committed. Over-commitment, in turn, frequently results in stress, personal conflicts, and burnout. Such over-commitment, in other words, leads to employees needing to take more care of themselves. This paper considers the prospects for meaningful self-care in the context of working time reduction. For this, we consider the case of the four-day workweek, asking employees of such organizations to explain how they make meaning out of their newly found time off. Conceptually, we rely upon the work of Michel Foucault, particularly his analysis of the care of the self. On its basis, we coded five self-care practices: (1) rest and recuperation, (2) professional and personal development, (3) domestic work, (4) balancing work, and (5) additional work. We conclude by highlighting the theoretical and practical implications of work reduction for the analytical, ethical, and practical pursuit of meaningful work.

The Resource-Based View (RBV) has been instrumental in shaping strategic management theory by underscoring the significance of a firm's unique, valuable, and hard-to-copy internal resources in securing competitive advantage. However, the conventional RBV framework, with its emphasis on static, possession-oriented resource conceptualization, falls short in addressing the dynamic and relational nature of resources in contemporary business environments. This paper aims to bridge this gap by introducing a processual perspective to the RBV, grounded in process philosophy. In this study, we delve into the philosophical underpinnings of RBV, critiquing its static ontological assumptions and proposing a shift towards a more dynamic and relational ontology. Drawing from the insights of process philosophers such as Whitehead and Bergson, and differentiating between 'strong' and 'weak' process views, we reconceptualize resources not as static entities, but as dynamic elements continually constituted and reconstituted within networks of relationships and ongoing organizational processes. This approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of resources, recognizing their evolutionary and interconnected nature. Our methodology involves a rigorous theoretical analysis and synthesis of existing RBV literature, coupled with philosophical inquiry to construct a novel framework for resource conceptualization. We demonstrate how this reconceptualization offers fresh insights into strategic management, particularly in formulating strategies that leverage the dynamic interplay of resources and in understanding the boundary between internal and external resources. This paper contributes to the RBV literature by offering a process-oriented perspective that aligns more closely with the complexities of modern strategic landscapes. By challenging and extending traditional RBV assumptions, we pave the way for future empirical research and theoretical development in strategic management, highlighting the significance of process philosophy in enriching management theories.