|
 |
by Helen J. Alford & Michael J. Naughton.
Notre Dame Press.
As a life-long Protestant, reading this fascinating and thought-provoking book felt
like drinking from a Catholic Social Teaching fire hose. The
authors set about addressing the significant split between the sacred
aspects of life and the secular-- especially business-- activities.
They argue that what is needed is an alternative vision of the purpose
of business as “working together for the common good.” They differentiate between foundational “good” (i.e., instrumental activities which lead to other beneficial outcomes) and excellent “goods” (i.e., which are ends in themselves). Business tends |
 |
to be preoccupied,
or exclusively focused upon, foundational goods to the exclusion of a
broader sense of collective or common good. Key among the “common
good” is the development of people— including owners, employees,
customers, suppliers, and local residents and fellow-citizens.
While business must be concerned with the effective utilization and
realization of “foundational goods” (e.g., profit, productivity,
efficiency) these are properly seen as means to the “excellent good” of
enhancing and developing people. To lose sight of this
over-arching purpose for business is to pervert it into a dysfunctional
institution.
Alford &
Naughton tap the tradition of “cardinal virtues” as the primary mechanisms
by which the common good is realized. Focusing attention upon prudence,
justice, temperance and courage—all 4 must be simultaneously pursued to
insure realistic, equitable, balanced and difficult solutions are found.
To ignore any of the four is to risk distorted answers to complex
problems.
After
building their philosophical and theological case, the authors turn their
attention to specific business issues: job-design, compensation, ownership
and marketing. Taking the virtues identified previously and applying them
to each issue, they trace the contours of the problem of a limited (i.e.,
strictly instrumental and non-common-good focus) perspective in business.
They then look to recent managerial innovations and offer a critique of
current practice in terms of each issue. Under job-design they use
prudence as the framework within which to critique Taylorism and
re-engineering, and to encourage the use of “cellular” manufacturing and
“human-centered” job-design. Justice frames their discussion of
compensation, and they propose a 3-factor model which includes needs,
contribution and economic sustainability. They advocate a contextualized,
skill-based model which acknowledges the constraints of the market while
realizing and developing the potential of people. Their discussion of
ownership is grounded in the virtue of temperance, and advocates the wide
distribution of ownership via Employee Stock Ownership Plans. Finally,
their discussion of advertising and product development emphasizes
truthfulness, relationships and “good” products.
What this
brief summary cannot fully communicate is the power of their coherent,
consistent and compelling framework for conceiving the purpose (and role)
of business. While I think their perspective underplays the importance of
fallenness and redemption, I think their depth of thinking about a
theology of business is heads and shoulders above anything else I’ve
encountered. Personally, I need to re-read and think about what they have
written much more carefully.
Reviewed by Dr. Randy Franz, 7/2002
|
|
