Business as a Calling; Work and the Examined Life;
1996, Michael Novak, The Free Press, New York, NY

For all the attention that this book gets, it's remarkable for how little it contributes to the discussion of business. It is also remarkable how poorly organized the book is. The following summary is not necessarily set out in the same order as the thoughts are collected in Novak's book. He seems to sprinkle various asides throughout his book in a way that makes it difficult to ever grab a hold of and follow the thread of his argument. Mr. Novak writes with the express intent to "change the way business schools talk about people in

After a brief introduction, Novak begins by turning to the question of "calling." In describing how one finds one calling he suggests that two things are normally required: "the God-given ability to do the job, and (equally God-given) enjoyment in doing it because of your desire to do it." After describing a variety of business persons and their respective callings, Novak concludes the chapter by raising four points about callings in general and those in business in particular. "First, each calling is unique to each individual.... Second, a calling requires certain preconditions. It requires more than desires; it requires talent.... Third, the true calling reveals its presence by the enjoyment and sense of renewed energies its practice yields us.... A fourth truth about callings is also apparent: they are not usually easy to discover."

Novak's discussion of calling is notable for two omissions. First, he posits the possibility of "calling" without an acknowledgment of a "caller." Not withstanding his theological training, one senses that he is very interested in making sure that his book will have relevance to a broad range of people in business including atheists, agnostics and, as he calls them, those who are "tone-deaf regarding religion." The second significant omission (when compared to the teachings of the Reformers) is that there is no discussion of the imperative to locate one's calling in the midst of the needs of our world. In other words, all of his discussion of calling is focused on our own internal sense of enjoyment and our talents to perform the work.

Novak also includes an introductory discussion of the nature of capitalism. He defines it as an economic system, dependent on an appropriate political system and a supportive moral-cultural system, that unites a large variety of social institutions... in the support of human economic creativity." Capitalism involves first the ability to notice or discover something that others unseeingly pass by and second, a disposition to take a risk to build on this discovery.

Following these introductory comments, Novak then lays out his case for why he characterizes business (which is often indistinguishable from capitalism in his writings) as a morally serious calling. He begins by rejecting the notion that fairness resides in the equality of results. He argues that in America, the emphasis has always been on equality of opportunity that, in turn, implies an inequality in efforts and outcomes. According to Novak, this inequality of outcomes is at the core of two total American concepts: freedom and opportunity.

Here are some of his justifications for viewing business as a moral calling: Using Andrew Carnegie as an example, Novak introduces a theme that he will return to over and over. Those who insist on equality in the name of helping the poor are actually doing the poor a disservice. Business is a wealth creation endeavor. In effect, he repeatedly makes the argument that "a rising tide will raise all boats." He argues that the opportunity to become rich provides the incentives needed for the creation of jobs, which results in the improvement of the lot of the poor. He supports these propositions, in part, by arguing from examples around the world today. According to Novak the poor are much better off in countries that have adopted a capitalist system than they are in socialist or communist alternatives.

Novak also scatters through his book a number of other reasons to conclude that a capitalist system and the practice of business within that system are good. Capitalism is a necessary condition for the success of democracy. Building our nation on commerce and industry was a way of avoiding the "tyranny of the majority." Commerce and industry focus the interests of citizens in many directions and makes it very difficult to form a single majority block that could begin to tyrannize a minority.

The practice of business also tends to build community. Capitalism reduces envy. Novak asks why so many earlier republics have failed and answers his question by suggesting that it is “envy” that has been responsible for their downfall. He argues that when the able-bodied observe that their material conditions are improving from year-to-year "they are led to compare where they are today with where they would like to be tomorrow. They stop comparing themselves with their neighbors." (Personally, this has not been my experience. Comparisons with the fortunes of one's peers tends to be a stronger inclination than mere satisfaction with an increase in personal wealth.)

Novak also notes a unique role for the institution of business in the formation of a virtuous society. He indicates that virtues tend to be developed by the institutions of society and then highlights a number of factors in our current climate that hinder the formation of a healthy public ethos of virtue. Arguing that intellectual and academic elites (and presumably those in government as well) have abandoned ("orphaned") virtue, he suggests that business can fill the breach. Business has a vested interest in virtue and is dependent on the moral-cultural institutions of a free society. Specifically, Novak identifies and discusses three virtues that are intrinsic to business and that are fostered by the practice of business: creativity, building community and practical realism.

Finally, Novak supports his endorsement of the capitalist system as the best means for addressing sinful human behavior. After noting the fundamental sinfulness of all persons, Novak goes on to state as follows: "No wise social system is designed to be peopled only by Saints... Thus a workable human system-especially a system of political economy that must harness the passions of the willful, the passionate, and even the unscrupulous-cannot be designed solely for Saints.... It must have plenty of checks and balances. It needs to divide every major form of power."

Having spent so much time on his systemic analysis, Novak also purports to address the question of whether capitalism is good for the "inner life of its own citizens." In other words, even if it is good for society as a whole, doesn't it have the effect of making those who practice business less virtuous? Having raised the question, however, as best I could determine, except with respect to the question of greed, he never specifically responds to it. In particular, I found no response to the frequently expressed concerns that competition and market forces tend to erode ethics and virtues.

Novak suggests that the notion that capitalism breeds greed "belongs in the kindergarten of sociological opinions." Capitalists, he argues, aim not so much for acquisition but "increase." Using a few historical examples he suggests that some of our best businesspersons have evidenced little interest in an improvement of their own material well-being. They are motivated more by the sheer joy of creating and exercising their creative wit than they are in the money that may or may not follow as a result of their efforts.

Having laid out his basic defense of capitalism and business, Novak then goes on to identify certain responsibilities of business. These he divides into two categories: responsibilities intrinsic to business and external responsibilities, i.e. ethics imposed as limitations upon business from without. One of Novak's key points is that merely practicing business is to engage in a moral good. Thus, he gives more attention to the seven corporate responsibilities of business that "spring from its own nature." His list includes the following: to satisfy customers with goods and services of real value; to make a reasonable return on the funds entrusted to the business corporation by its investors; to create new wealth; to create new jobs; to defeat envy through generating upward mobility and putting empirical ground under the conviction that hard work and talent are fairly rewarded; to promote invention, ingenuity and, in general, "progress in the arts and useful sciences"; and to diversify the interests of the republic.

The responsibilities that are imposed from without include: to establish within the firm a sense of community and respect for the dignity of persons; to protect the political soil of liberty; to exemplify respect for law; to promote social justice; to communicate often and fully with investors, shareholders, pensioners, customers, and employees; to contribute to making its own habitat, the surrounding society, a better place; and to protect the moral ecology of freedom.

In what I find to be a surprising conclusion of his book, Novak dedicates the last three chapters to a discussion of what businesses can do around the world that goes beyond the mere practice of business. I say I find this surprising because so much of the emphasis up to this point in the book has been on how the mere practice of business is itself a moral calling. In these last three chapters Novak appears to be giving support to those who argue that business itself is neutral and that it is only those extra-business activities that can convert a business calling into a moral life.

In chapter 8 he discusses the potential impact that American firms can have on totalitarian and authoritarian regimes in a global economy. He gives lip service to the traditional approach of "constructive engagement" but argues that corporations need to go beyond that. Not only must they in themselves embody the practice of human rights but they must also seek to persuade oppressive regimes to change their behavior by speaking out against their practices. (Novak acknowledges, however, that this dialogue should happen in a delicate and politically sensitive way.)

In chapter 9, Novak addresses the adverse consequences of downsizing. He offers several ways that business could advocate for changes (presumably in laws) that could reduce the adverse impact of unemployment. He suggests that health care and pensions should be made portable, i.e. able to follow the employees. He also has a notion that labor unions should be converted into corporations hiring out temporary workers to companies on a project-by-project basis.

Finally, he returns again to Andrew Carnegie in his final chapter entitled "Giving it All Away." He discusses Carnegie' s notion of giving his wealth away in his lifetime at some length, and then moving from Carnegie, goes on to argue that giving money away is "a refined art." "To shovel it out the door is easy; to produce the desired effects and choose the right hands to put it in are two far more difficult tasks."

By ending with this chapter, one has the sense that Novak has concerns regarding the accumulation of wealth and finds the moral good in such accumulation when it is given away. If this indeed is his position, he never wrestles with the apparent contradiction between this notion and his earlier arguments that the possibility for the accumulation of wealth encourage risk-taking that promotes society in general.

In general, I found his book fairly dissatisfying particularly given the frequency with which it is quoted. Its praise for capitalism and business appears to be fairly simplistic. It never gets close to wrestling with some of the more difficult challenges to the system. Perhaps, however, in an age where the entertainment media, the press, and the clergy regularly critique the practice of business in the capitalist system, it is useful to have a strong voice that clearly identifies some of its countervailing virtues and benefits.

Reviewed by Jeff Van Duzer, J.D.. 7/2002