{"id":1016,"date":"2002-02-01T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-02-01T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/?post_type=articolo&p=1016"},"modified":"2026-04-12T19:10:41","modified_gmt":"2026-04-12T17:10:41","slug":"managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization","status":"publish","type":"articolo","link":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/","title":{"rendered":"Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization"},"content":{"rendered":"

University of Notre Dame Press, South Bend, 2001, pp. 336, $ 21,95 ($ 38,95 hardback)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Contents<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
Foreword
\nRobert Wahlstedt, Founder and former President of Reell Precision Manufacturing
\nPreface
\nJean-Loup Dherse, former CEO of the Eurotunnel project, former Vice President of the World Bank, andMember of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum
\nAcknowledgements
\nIntroduction 1
\nI. ESTABLISHING THE ENGAGEMENT<\/p>\n

1. Making Us Whole: Avoiding Split Personalities
\n2. The Purpose of Business: Working Together for the Common Good
\n3. The Virtues: Human Development in the Corporate Community<\/p>\n

II. MAKING THE ENGAGEMENT<\/p>\n

4. Job Design: Prudence and Subsidiarity in Operations
\n5. Just Wages: Justice and the Subjective Dimension of Work in Human Resources
\n6. Corporate Ownership: Temperance and Common Use in Finance
\n7. Marketing Communication and Product Development: Courage and Solidarity in Marketing<\/p>\n

III. SUSTAINING THE ENGAGEMENT<\/p>\n

8. Faith, Hope and Charity: Authentic Habits of a Christian Spirituality of Work
\n9. Liturgy: The Source and Summit of Our Work
\nEpilogue
\nNotes
\nIndex<\/td>\n

ixxiii
\nxix<\/p>\n

7
\n38
\n70<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

99
\n125
\n152
\n177<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

207
\n229
\n243
\n247
\n321<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

 <\/p>\n

Management, Sviluppo Umano e Bene Comune<\/strong><\/p>\n

Alessandro Pietrogiacomi<\/em><\/p>\n

Managing as if Faith Mattered<\/em>, tratta in modo organico ed originale \u2013 forse unico nel suo genere – il tema del rapporto tra spiritualit\u00e0 e direzione aziendale, ispirandosi al ricco patrimonio della tradizione sociale cristiana.<\/p>\n

Tuttavia, non siamo di fronte ad un saggio di letteratura manageriale \u201ceterodossa\u201d\u00a01<\/sup>\u00a0quale potrebbe essere una lettura interpretativa del mondo degli affari di tipo religioso, n\u00e9 ad un trattato sulla dimensione etica dell\u2019economia, ma, al contrario, ad un testo di\u00a0business management<\/em>, caratterizzato da numerosi richiami applicativi ed una robusta fondazione teorica.<\/p>\n

Infatti – e questa forse costituisce la vera novit\u00e0 del libro – le argomentazioni dei due Autori sono rigorosamente articolate all\u2019interno del perimetro organizzativo aziendale e si rivolgono a dirigenti e imprenditori, utilizzando il loro stesso linguaggio tecnico, nel rispetto di una visione sistemica della dimensione aziendale che va oltre la ricerca meramente strumentale del profitto<\/p>\n

Leggendo il testo e accantonando per un momento la pur legittima esitazione nei confronti di due apparenti\u00a0outsiders<\/em>\u00a0quali Helen J. Alford O.P. e Michael J. Naughton\u00a02<\/sup>, il lettore – presumibilmente, ma non necessariamente, un manager di fede cattolica – sar\u00e0 sorpreso nel riscontrare un originale percorso logico, corredato da una profonda familiarit\u00e0 con le dinamiche organizzative e le tecniche direzionali tipiche delle moderne realt\u00e0 industriali, finanziarie e commerciali.<\/p>\n

Gli Autori, infatti, dimostrano di conoscere a fondo il complesso e articolato sistema aziendale, descrivendo e qualificando, sul piano metodologico e nei confronti della tradizione sociale cristiana, praticamente tutte le principali funzioni manageriali, dai sistemi di organizzazione industriale (vedi le riflessioni sul Job design nel Cap.4), alla gestione delle risorse umane (vedi le strategie retributive trattate nel Cap.5), per concludere con gli Employee Stock Ownership Plans (trattati al Cap.6) e le pi\u00f9 recenti strategie di Relationship Marketing e Quality Function Deployment (v. Cap.7).<\/p>\n

Ne risulta quindi un libro particolarmente efficace per la riuscita consonanza tra pensiero cattolico e cultura d\u2019impresa, che tuttavia non si esaurisce in un originale saggio di direzione aziendale ma va oltre, inducendo il lettore ad almeno due ordini di considerazioni, che potremmo sintetizzare nelle seguenti questioni:<\/p>\n

1. Esiste un rapporto possibile tra la dimensione spirituale (tipicamente privata) e il comportamento manageriale (comunemente di relazione ovvero con caratteristiche sociali);<\/p>\n

2. Quali possono essere le relazioni tra i principi del pensiero sociale cristiano e la teoria economica delle moderne organizzazioni d\u2019impresa.<\/p>\n

Gli Autori dedicano i primi tre capitoli del libro alla fondazione teorica del bisogno d\u2019integrazione tra fede e ambito professionale, rilevando come, al pari d\u2019altre connotazioni inerenti alla persona, quali la razza, il sesso e il pensiero politico, la dimensione spirituale sia spesso relegata, opportunisticamente, nell\u2019ambito della sfera privata in modo da inibire potenziali infiltrazioni morali sui processi decisionali e, in ultima analisi, sui risultati aziendali.<\/p>\n

Tale cultura dominante – segnalano gli Autori – esplica un effetto riduttivo nel manager, inibendone la piena realizzazione personale sul piano sociale, cognitivo e spirituale almeno quanto l\u2019archetipo opposto, rappresentato da coloro i quali testimoniano la propria fede in modo esplicito e manifesto, esclusivamente al di fuori degli ambienti professionali in cui operano, vivendo cos\u00ec una mera religiosit\u00e0 di superficie.<\/p>\n

Il superamento di tale condizione limitata e limitante non avviene per\u00f2, nel pensiero degli Autori, attraverso una semplice ricetta di tipo prescrittivo, fondata sul richiamo a dei generici valori etici e morali, bens\u00ec mediante una costante tensione verso le virt\u00f9 cardinali della tradizione cristiana cui il manager pu\u00f2 ispirarsi per ristabilire una vera armonia tra il proprio lavoro e la personale dimensione spirituale: Prudenza, Giustizia, Temperanza e Coraggio.<\/p>\n

Sul piano teorico poi, Alford e Naughton, affrontano la questione del rapporto tra fede e attivit\u00e0 economica esponendo le problematiche di tipo etico e sociale tipicamente risultanti dalla natura strumentale delle teorie dello\u00a0shareholder<\/em>\u00a0e dello\u00a0stakeholder<\/em>, e, dopo una rigorosa revisione critica dei due menzionati approcci teorici, suggeriscono una rilettura dei moderni sistemi economici fondata su nuovi e alternativi modelli d\u2019impresa, ispirati ad un principio di management socialmente responsabile e finalizzato al Bene Comune.<\/p>\n

In conclusione, dal messaggio esplicito degli Autori, traspare con forza che le forze competitive sottostanti le dinamiche del mercato e le leggi finanziarie demandate al governo dell\u2019impresa, non possono essere elevate al rango di guida dell\u2019azione umana, pur condizionandone concretamente lo svolgimento. Al contrario, i principi della solidariet\u00e0, della sussidiariet\u00e0, della supremazia del lavoro sul capitale e della destinazione universale dei beni, possono e debbono concorrere ad umanizzare la comunit\u00e0 professionale, finalizzando le dinamiche economiche e le decisioni d\u2019impresa al conseguimento del Bene Comune e dello Sviluppo Umano.<\/p>\n

Management, Sviluppo Umano e Bene Comune rappresentano quindi le\u00a0keywords<\/em>\u00a0di un\u2019auspicata edizione italiana del lavoro di Alford e Naughton, cui va riconosciuto il merito di rivolgersi in modo efficace e originale al manager come persona e come attore di un disegno ambizioso ed esaltante: quello di creare valore non solamente per l\u2019azienda ma per la propria comunit\u00e0 e per tutta la societ\u00e0 civile, rendendosi artefice di un cambiamento virtuoso dei propri comportamenti professionali allo scopo di orientarli verso uno sviluppo economico equo, solidale e socialmente responsabile.<\/p>\n

NOTE<\/p>\n

\u00a01<\/sup>\u00a0Da alcuni anni, un certo filone di letteratura manageriale ama ispirarsi ai principi e paradigmi comportamentali di origine eterodossa, quali la matematica (vedi la teoria dei giochi applicata al business), la filosofia orientale (vedi Sun Tzu, l\u2019arte della guerra), la strategia militare (primo tra tutti Von Clawsevitz), e la storia della politica (es. Machiavelli).<\/p>\n

\u00a02<\/sup>\u00a0Diamo un breve sguardo al curriculum dei due autori. Helen Alford O.P. insegna alla Facolt\u00e0 di Scienze Sociali dell\u2019Universit\u00e0 Pontificia S.Tommaso d\u2019Aquino dove riveste l\u2019incarico di Decano; dopo il Master in Engineering ha conseguito un PhD in Engineering e Management presso l\u2019Universit\u00e0 di Cambridge e si \u00e8 occupata, durante e dopo il dottorato, di cellular manufacturing, e human-centered design. Michael Naughton, invece, associa al suo dottorato in Teologia un qualificato Master in Business Administration ed insegna presso la Graduate School of Business dell\u2019Universit\u00e0 S.Thomas (St.Paul, MN) dove si occupa prevalentemente dei rapporti tra pensiero sociale cattolico e il mondo dell\u2019impresa.<\/p>\n

Justice, instrumentality, solidarity<\/strong>
\nand the conflicting pull of the markets<\/strong>
\nA reflection on chapters 5, 6 and 7 of Managing as if Faith Mattered<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Peter Davis<\/em><\/p>\n

Reviewing this book my overall response was emotional rather than intellectual. What I felt mostly was a feeling of solidarity with the authors and the many fine people in industry and the academic world upon whose ideas and experience they drew. Goodwill, dialogue and the belief in not only the need but also the possibility for improvement in the world of employment and business clearly drive this book. The chapters I have chosen to respond to deal with management strategies concerning employment (ch 5), the question of models for the ownership of business assets and profits (ch 6) and the issues involved in marketing products and services (ch 7). In these chapters the authors Helen Alford and Michael Naughton come to the crunch issues. Without methodologies for the ownership of assets, the selling and distribution of goods and services, and the management of people as if faith matters the whole project of the book would have been seriously compromised.<\/p>\n

I shall not dwell very much on what these chapters have to say. I assume anyone reading this piece will already be familiar with the book itself. I want to focus here on where I would like to see the argument taken and developed. There are three important issues I believe Catholics need to consider further in making a positive response to the work in these three chapters. They are as follows:<\/p>\n

1) The implication that flows from the case in ch 5, arguing that the organisation can in some circumstances be justified in paying a wage lower than the criteria set for a living wage.<\/p>\n

2) The significance of the free market context, which may create the economic necessity to pay below a living wage.<\/p>\n

3) The critical linkages between Catholic Social Thought with regard to trade unions and co-operative societies and the solution to the difficulties that can arise from the realities described in 1 and 2 above.<\/p>\n

\"hrm1\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Demands \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Solution: \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Demands\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

forReturn on investment \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0The least cost option \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0for value and quality<\/strong><\/p>\n

The existence of the market mechanism embraces all forms of business activity and ownership. It is after\u00a0all<\/em>\u00a0the operation of the market applied to labour that reduces workers to a dependent commodity. In conditions of labour shortage most of the instrumental strategies of HRM are unworkable and counter productive for the firms strategic needs. In conditions of acute over-supply and governmental deregulation the ground is set for Christian firms to be theologically and economically justified in paying below a living wage (see p. 136). Market forces limit managers. The authors also acknowledge this (see p. 137). It is when we come to the solution as one of integration of justice (Christian purpose) with strategic thinking (see p. 147 to end) that we run up against the market. It is here that customer-defined quality in the retail market and investor-led aspirations concerning expected added-value for investment in the capital market meet in the organisation. They both impact critically and their presence often results in the HRM strategic requirement of the \u201cleast cost solution\u201d. Such a solution very often has a detrimental impact on the conditions on labour and the environmental impact of the operation. The current \u201cover supply\u201d of labour in the contemporary labour market context ensures this least cost solution is generally very easily extracted from labour (see fig. 1).<\/p>\n

Workers from a Christian perspective can never be in \u201cover-supply\u201d. That their labour can create greater value than it consumes provides the economic basis for workers to generate their own employment and lies at the base of all work whether conducted in an employment or domestic context. Labour is, as Adam Smith acknowledged, the primary source of value. The social significance of work \u2013 the solidarity of labour \u2013 goes to heart of the reason we must take the discussion further to explore relationships and purposes in business at the level of the market. The book\u00a0Managing as if Faith Matters<\/em>\u00a0challenges us about the purpose of business at an early stage in its analysis. The central argument I want to propose here is that the more businesses we can encourage into the market place that are not led by investor based capital the greater the chances are that we may establish those purposes in the marketplace that are human and creation centred. A central purpose, (good in itself), for work and for the creation of value through our work is that of solidarity. I mean this in the sense that it is through solidarity in the community of work that we realise so much of our humanity and purpose.<\/p>\n

1. Solidarity encourages us to recognise that whatever work does to us has consequences for the wider community of friends, family and neighbours and beyond, to the wider society.<\/p>\n

2. Solidarity also enables us to recognise that it is not work in abstract that shapes us but work as manifest in the networks of relationships and exchanges with other workers.<\/p>\n

3. Solidarity also requires us to see the importance of the market power of labour in association and its potential to improve the conditions of labour.<\/p>\n

4. Solidarity is a key aspect of our relationship with God. When we show solidarity with those who are poor we honour God. When we gather together in solidarity in His Church we become His body on earth. We are a chosen people. Our work can only bear fruit when undertaken according to our relationship with Him.<\/p>\n

Co-operation as an idea is a key mechanism for the organisation of labour around this principle of solidarity. It can play a critical part in meeting the workers\u2019 needs for solidarity across all the four dimensions I suggest above. In co-operatives producers own the assets of their business and as either workers, fishermen or farmers combine their labour with their ownership of the assets. In a like manner consumers of services and products can also under the co-operative model own the means of distribution and production of the goods and services they consume. I want to assert here the co-operative significance as a mechanism operating for justice at the level of the marketplace. This is true whether we look at the markets for capital, for labour or for the consumption of goods and services. It is ultimately the behaviour of actors in the capital and consumer markets that sets the standards and constraints for the management of all the human and natural resources along the supply chains for all traded goods and services. On the one hand we have the expectations and behaviour of investors in the global capital markets seeking the very highest returns on their investments. On the other, the demand for the best value for money from products and services informs much of contemporary consumer behaviour. In these conditions the struggle between justice and HRM will always be an unequal one (see Fig. 1 above).<\/p>\n

A business community dominated by firms whose shares are tradable on the capital market is unlikely in the future, as it has proved unwilling in the past, to take on board the ideals and values of the enlightened few. The first man reputedly to use the word socialism who became the founder of early attempts at the beginning of the British Industrial Revolution to form communitarian co-operatives and general trade unions was himself a self-made industrialist. Robert Owen only turned to co-operative self-help solutions for the working classes because the ruling class of his age rejected his calls for reform of the labour market. Owen demonstrated at his model factory in New Lanark that utilising the best management methods and latest technologies could produce highly profitable returns for investors without the use of child labour and provide high quality housing and educational facilities for the families of his employees. But his reports to Parliament fell on deaf ears. As a social scientist I can see scant evidence that the experience and examples of the modern \u201cNew Lanark\u201d examples mentioned in this book will fare any better than Owen did.<\/p>\n

The British Co-operative Bank<\/strong><\/p>\n

The case study of the British Co-operative Bank is illustrative of my point. It controls merely around 4% of the British retail banking market. Its impact on banking standards has been profound. It was the first bank to introduce charge fee current accounts, the first to give interest on positive balances in current account, and the first to offer a charge free credit card. The other banks have had to followed suit. The Co-operative Bank was the only bank to challenge the big commercial banks decision to levy charges for the use of their ATMs ( it was supported in this by the Nationwide Building Society \u2013 itself a co-operative). Again the big banks had to back down. Now hardly any charge for the use of their ATMs the Co-operative bank has set new standards in ethical banking and is currently rated amongst the top fifty best employers in the UK. I do not know the exact figures for the savings to the retail banking consumer that the British Co-operative bank has ensured but it must be measured in billions over the years. None of these activities has prevented the Co-operative Bank from putting in exceptional financial performances year on year.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The authors Helen and Michael might fairly respond that this is not the issue as they are trying to influence men and women\u00a0of faith<\/em>. The problem with this is that the majority of organisations globally, and this is where the nation state\u2019s market is increasingly shaped, are not controlled by women and men of faith and are thus unlikely to be self motivated to ensure justice and strategy are integrated as is called for by the authors. Market forces will ensure that capital-based business, which ultimately is driven by the need to maintain share value and meet investors\u2019 expectations, will continue to treat labour as an instrument, and not as a partner in the creation of value.<\/p>\n

The potential market-based advantage the co-operative form of business has lies in its not being based on tradable shares and in the different determination of its central purpose. This makes co-operatives less vulnerable to the pressure to produce the highest returns on capital possible. Co-operatives need just enough capital to ensure maintenance and development of the business to provide continuous and consistently excellent service to customers. A just wage seems more feasible, even in difficult market conditions, in the co-operative organisational context. In their ability to affect the terms of exchange in the labour and consumer markets, the co-operative business plays a wider role in ensuring Christian standards of justice get applied across the whole business community. The co-operative contribution is most significant as a supporting market context for all managers trying to manage as if faith mattered, even when working in businesses competing with the co-operative sector.\u00a0Co-operatives can help set employment and consumer standards that influence market standards as a whole<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Without this associational leverage in the market context there is no mechanism to drive the idea of labour as more than a resource with a price on its head. We cannot simply assert on theological grounds that labour is something more than just a factor of production. The theological grounds are the\u00a0justification<\/em>\u00a0certainly for the concept of justice and the\u00a0foundation<\/em>\u00a0for the spirituality of work that informs the discussion in the last chapter of this book. But it will not of itself be a sufficient\u00a0mechanism for implementation<\/em>\u00a0of those standards of justice to which Christian managers of all businesses should aspire. It is in the market place, not simply within the organisation, that we must press the cause of Labour. Co-operative and Trade Union organisations\u00a0together<\/em>\u00a0provide complementary structures for labour to gain market leverage. Whether that leverage is used for good or ill depends on the leadership in these organisations adopting the purposes outlined in\u00a0Managing as if Faith<\/em>\u00a0Mattered just as much as it does on their counterparts in share-based firms. Improving justice in employment in share-based firms and the opportunities for wider application of the schemes outlined will be more likely in a context where co-operative production and distribution plays a significant role in shaping the marketplace.<\/p>\n

Giving other stakeholders shares and making them shareholders may be good for industrial relations and improve equity (see ch 6). It will not solve the issue of labour in the economy. It may even add to the polarisation of society and the fragmentation of labour solidarity. Firms who protect their labour with strong internal labour markets will form an elite. Those in the majority, operating in the less secure sectors of industry, will operate employment conditions reflecting the marginal nature of the firms that employ them. The solidarity of labour beyond that of the organisation in Trades Unions has been the most effective defence workers have so far evolved. Rising share values help those who own them. The dual labour market (which many see as a feature of the global economy and post- war capitalism in general) will be reinforced as some workers benefit and others loose in the ups and downs of the share capital market. Whereas institutional investors spread their risks the ESOP concept means that savings from wages are all sunk into one single risk. If the ESOP firm fails workers loose their source of income and a substantial proportion of their savings just when they need them most.<\/p>\n

In both the consumer market and the labour market a wider range of choice in terms of the\u00a0forms of ownership and the definition of the purpose of organisation<\/em>\u00a0by which business is conducted will lead to the opportunity for standards to be set as if faith matters. Co-operatives provide one significant and tried mechanism. Their community and human-centred values and principles facilitate a creation and human-centred business, which could be managed as if faith mattered. Co-operative membership is rewarded through the provision of member services, not return on capital. At the level of the market place the existence of co-operative business can tip the market in the consumers\u2019 favour and establish just employment by providing a popularly-owned business. Such business forms are more likely to recognise community interests and social and environmental issues. They will not have to always seek the least cost options but can seek the most sustainable ones. This creates a market awareness in consumers that can force the general range of companies competing to adopt higher standards than they might otherwise have done, to both worker and consumer advantage. It is not a case of denying the investor a fair return. It is a case of co-operatives existence giving a better balance of market power across all stake-holders.<\/p>\n

Management needs principles to guide it and an organisational purpose and culture to support it. Management operating in market conditions which are not dominated by share based businesses are much more likely to sustain a management strategy evolved as if faith matters. The book\u00a0Managing as if Faith Matters<\/em>\u00a0makes a convincing and important case that Faith does matter. By focusing on the organisation and managers in the organisation it emphasises the important ethical and social role of management. It demonstrates how important it is for us to recognise the role of purpose and values in determining management culture.<\/p>\n

It also points to the limitations on management as well as their importance. The discussion amongst Christians now needs to broaden on the basis of the principles in this book to discuss the importance of alternative forms of business and their role in creating a\u00a0market for faith rather than simply an organisation of faith<\/em>. I am not arguing that only co-operatives can be Christian or that co-operative principles are the same as Christian principles when applied to business. My point is that the existence of strong co-operatives based in the community and focused on service delivery can create the kind of competitive pressure that will make it important for other forms of business to adopt similar standards. Their presence can lessen the market pressure for shares with its emphasis on profit maximisation rather than stakeholder equity, environmental sustainability and the dignity of labour.<\/p>\n

In such a situation, the opportunity for managers and business leaders who want to operate as if their faith matters will be enhanced. The victory of Christian values in business will not be inevitable but with prayer and the habits of faith and service to guide Christian managers, workers and business leaders, the conditions will be more favourable in\u00a0all<\/em>\u00a0forms of business organisation for the establishment of the Christian agenda. Managing as if Faith matters is about how we create value and how we consume it. Consumer values, attitudes and behaviour will be shaped by patterns of consumption\u00a0and<\/em>\u00a0production. To this writer it seems inconceivable to have a spirituality of work which did not inform a spirituality of consumption and recreation. Marketing is part of the struggle for the soul as well as for the custom of the consumer. It is not just about the purchase or choice of a commodity\/ service but also about the adoption of a culture. Marketing as if faith mattered is not simply about responding to consumer needs. It is about recognising consumer concerns \u2013 consumer solidarity with producers, with other consumers and their collective responsibility for God\u2019s creation.<\/p>\n

The way in which we manage our consumption is just as significant as how we manage our production. Managers at various stages in the supply chain and in the PR and Marketing Functions must listen to consumers and workers to establish not simply a learning community but a\u00a0learning community of faith<\/em>. Then the multi-dimensional aspects of human labour will be better understood and better practised. Domestic work will be recognised as an equal partner to paid employment and the transitions between them mutually supporting and rewarding rather than sources of stress, conflict, lost opportunities and broken relationships.<\/p>\n

Fig 2. Co-operatives, Solidarity, and Market Behaviour<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Modified behaviour \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Modified behaviour<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"smb\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The tide of individualism and materialism seems to be sweeping across the globe. There could not be a more opportune moment for this book. What it urges us to reflect upon is how to bring about a reversal of this tide? How do we commence the management of business as if it were God\u2019s business?<\/p>\n

1. Prayer for change must be the starting point. Prayer for reform and innovation towards more human-centred strategies in all forms of business.<\/p>\n

2. Prayers for Managers to receive grace for ingenuity, courage, vision and integrity.<\/p>\n

3. Prayers for Co-operative and Trade Union development. Prayers for Managers committed to service to enter these movements and provide the leadership needed for them to change the balance of power from capital to people in the marketplace.<\/p>\n

4. Prayers for ourselves to receive the grace to act, in whatever capacity God has placed us, as if our Faith matters.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Un commento dalla prospettiva della scienza economica a Managing as if faith mattered<\/strong><\/p>\n

Luigino Bruni<\/em><\/p>\n

Non sono n\u00e9 un produttore n\u00e9 un utilizzatore di teorie sul management. Questo commento sar\u00e0 pertanto una riflessione che un cultore di economia politica fa attorno alla lettura di un buon libro di economia aziendale, dal quale confesso di aver appreso molte cose nuove e ricche di stimoli intellettuali.<\/p>\n

La prima cosa che ho appreso dalla lettura \u00e8 la differenza di linguaggio e di metodo tra due discipline che dovrebbero essere molto simili, e cio\u00e8 l\u2019economia politica e l\u2019economia aziendale (l\u2019economics<\/em>\u00a0e la\u00a0business administration<\/em>). E la mia prima reazione, positiva, \u00e8 stata proprio constatare che categorie e dimensioni, per me importanti, ma molto marginali, se non del tutto assenti nella letteratura dell\u2019economia politica, sono invece \u201cdi casa\u201d nell\u2019economia aziendale: \u00e8 il caso, ad esempio, del tema delle dimensioni qualitative delle relazioni umane, della spiritualit\u00e0, della felicit\u00e0, o delle virt\u00f9.<\/p>\n

Una seconda riflessione \u00e8 nata poi dal constatare che alcuni concetti usati dagli autori del libro potessero essere arricchiti, o almeno complicati, da un dialogo con la scienza economica.<\/p>\n

Sono queste due reazioni che hanno prodotto le riflessioni contenute in questa nota.<\/p>\n

Il libro apre con una dichiarazione d\u2019intenti molto chiara: offrire un contributo per superare la personalit\u00e0 \u201csplit\u201d di molti cristiani: cristiani nella vita privata e affettiva, e come tutti gli altri nella vita lavorativa, considerata come un ambito in cui la fede resta fuori dai cancelli perch\u00e9 \u201cnon addetta ai lavori\u201d. Una delle cause di questa personalit\u00e0 dicotomica \u00e8 la mancanza di una formazione culturale adeguata per pensare fino in fondo alle conseguenze che la fede cristiana ha nella vita civile. Il libro vuole fornire un utile strumento a questo scopo. E lo fa con una\u00a0pars denstruens<\/em>\u00a0e con una\u00a0pars construens<\/em>: criticando cio\u00e8 le principali teorie moderne del management (in particolare la teoria classica centrata sugli\u00a0shareholders<\/em>\u00a0e quella, pi\u00f9 recente, degli\u00a0stakeholders<\/em>), e proponendo una nuova concettualizzazione del management, ipotizzando che la fede conti qualcosa\u00a0anche<\/em>\u00a0nel mondo del lavoro e nelle organizzazioni produttive (come recita il titolo, originale, del libro).<\/p>\n

La teoria proposta \u00e8 quella di\u00a0organizzazioni concepite come comunit\u00e0 di lavoro, i cui membri lavorano insieme per il conseguimento, diretto e intenzionale, del \u201cbene comune\u201d<\/em>. Una impostazione quindi in linea con la dottrina sociale della chiesa, ma con una sua originalit\u00e0 di indubbio interesse, perch\u00e9 l\u2019antica categoria del bene comune qui prende le forme di una proposta, ragionata, di uno stile di gestione di organizzazioni produttive moderne e complesse.<\/p>\n

Gli autori costruiscono questa loro proposta, o modello, attraverso l\u2019introduzione di diverse teorie, tutte tra loro molto legate. Mi concentrer\u00f2 su due di esse, che hanno richiamato particolarmente il mio interesse, e che nel libro svolgono una funzione non marginale.<\/p>\n

La prima \u00e8 quella che verte sulla distinzione tra\u00a0beni di base<\/em>\u00a0(\u201cfoundational goods\u201d) e\u00a0beni d\u2019eccellenza<\/em>\u00a0(\u201cexcellent goods\u201d). I beni di base in un\u2019impresa corrispondono ai bisogni base di un individuo: come l\u2019individuo se non soddisfa i bisogni primari (mangiare, bere, vestire …) non pu\u00f2 fruire di beni superiori quali l\u2019amicizia, la filosofia o le arti, cos\u00ec un\u2019impresa se non realizza profitti e non assicura redditi agli azionisti non pu\u00f2 produrre altre forme di ricchezza pi\u00f9 alte, i beni d\u2019eccellenza appunto, quali la realizzazione umana, spirituale e relazionale dei vari soggetti dell\u2019impresa. Come nella vita umana esiste una gerarchia di bisogni (il riferimento alla gerarchia di bisogni di Maslow \u00e8 esplicita e non messa sostanzialmente in discussione), cos\u00ec anche nella vita d\u2019impresa esiste una gerarchia di obiettivi da raggiungere: prima si assicurano le condizioni per l\u2019esistenza dell\u2019impresa (la redditivit\u00e0 e l\u2019efficienza), e solo una volta assicurati questi obiettivi di base (foundational), l\u2019impresa pu\u00f2 permettersi di puntare all\u2019eccellenza.<\/p>\n

Una prima considerazione. Se da una parte \u00e8 difficile negare la logica e il buon senso di una tale impostazione, dall\u2019altra occorre aggiungere ulteriori precisazioni per non cadere in alcune semplici aporie. Infatti mentre \u00e8 indubbio che un\u2019impresa che punti all\u2019eccellenza non pu\u00f2 non soddisfare requisiti minimali di efficienza, occorre per\u00f2 aggiungere che dal punto di vista etico (che \u00e8 quello seguito dagli autori) non \u00e8 accettabile un\u2019impresa che puntasse solo ai primi beni (i foundational) senza curarsi dell\u2019eccellenza, o pensare che i secondi debbano essere necessariamente \u201csecondi\u201d, cio\u00e8 venire gerarchicamente dopo i primi. Questa non \u00e8 ovviamente l\u2019intenzione degli autori, che invece, anche se in modo implicito, sembrano suggerire un approccio sincronico e globale ai vari tipi di bisogni: l\u2019impresa deve puntare\u00a0subito, e allo stesso tempo<\/em>, ai vari tipi di bisogni, evitando di pensare che i primi abbiano una priorit\u00e0 sui secondi. Se infatti non si elimina questo modo di pensare e di teorizzare (che nella teoria economica ha radici molto profonde: possiamo risalire almeno a J.S. Mill) si arriva alla conclusione che il \u201ccome\u201d si assicurano le condizioni minimali di efficienza e redditivit\u00e0 non sia importante almeno quanto il raggiungimento degli obiettivi stessi. Non esiste, in altre parole, una neutralit\u00e0 nel conseguire redditivit\u00e0 e efficienza, poich\u00e9 i mezzi impiegati per raggiungerle incorporano gi\u00e0 giudizi etici e di valore, che rendono possibile o meno il raggiungimento dei fini, cio\u00e8 la produzione di beni di eccellenza. Ogni scelta di produzione e di efficienza \u00e8 gi\u00e0 da subito una scelta che incide sui bisogni d\u2019eccellenza, quali la qualit\u00e0 delle relazioni aziendali, la dimensione etica dell\u2019efficienza (si pensi all\u2019ambiente ad esempio) e l\u2019impatto sociale.\u00a01<\/sup><\/p>\n

La seconda teoria introdotta dagli autori \u00e8 la distinzione tra\u00a0beni di allocazione e beni di partecipazione<\/em>. I primi sono necessariamente beni privati (beni il cui consumo da parte di un soggetto riduce, o impedisce, il consumo degli altri: si pensi ad un paio di scarpe o ad una torta), i secondi invece, sono beni il cui consumo di un soggetto aggiuntivo non riduce, o addirittura aumenta, il consumo degli altri. Esempi di questo secondo ordine di beni sono una conversazione piacevole, o il clima di fiducia che si costruisce in un dipartimento di un\u2019impresa, o l\u2019intero clima aziendale.<\/p>\n

La teoria economica conosce questi beni, anche se li chiama diversamente (i beni di partecipazione sono chiamati \u201cbeni relazionali\u201d o \u201cbeni networks\u201d), ma \u2013 e qui viene la differenza di approccio tra le due discipline, dalla quale sono partito in questa nota \u2013 li studia con obiettivi molto diversi. Infatti l\u2019interesse degli economisti per i beni pubblici (che dai nostri autori vengono chiamati \u201ccomuni\u201d, mentre in economia politica i \u201cpublic goods\u201d e i \u201ccommons\u201d sono beni sostanzialmente diversi) nasce dal problema del cosiddetto\u00a0free riding<\/em>, e cio\u00e8 dal constatare che quando esistono beni di uso comune, il cui consumo di un soggetto non \u00e8 in rivalit\u00e0 con quello degli altri, e normalmente non pu\u00f2 essere escluso a chi non contribuisce alla sua creazione (si pensi ad un marciapiede pubblico o alla difesa nazionale), il problema che nella realt\u00e0 subito sorge \u00e8 quello di voler usufruire del bene senza volerne sopportare gli oneri per la sua produzione; viene cio\u00e8 la tentazione di non \u201cpagare il biglietto\u201d. E gli economisti studiano questi beni cercando di disegnare dei meccanismi per far s\u00ec che i soggetti siano \u201ccostretti\u201d o incentivati a contribuire ai beni pubblici di cui godono.<\/p>\n

Gli autori del libro in oggetto non accennano al problema del\u00a0free riding<\/em>\u00a0nella loro trattazione. In un certo senso questo \u00e8 normale, poich\u00e9 i beni di partecipazione delle aziende descritti sono abbastanza diversi dall\u2019illuminazione pubblica o da un ponte, poich\u00e9 c\u2019\u00e8 un elemento che li rende qualcosa di peculiare, e cio\u00e8 che per usufruire di quei beni occorre \u201cparteciparvi\u201d: non posso non contribuire se voglio godere di una \u201cgradevole conversazione\u201d durante un intervallo di lavoro. Questo fenomeno \u00e8 descritto dagli economisti con una strana parola che per\u00f2 rende l\u2019idea: i soggetti che hanno a che fare con questo tipo di beni sono \u201cpro-sumatori\u201d, cio\u00e8 possono consumare solo se contemporaneamente producono.<\/p>\n

Questa peculiarit\u00e0, per\u00f2, non elimina del tutto il problema del\u00a0free-riding<\/em>, che \u00e8 (a mio parere) una delle conseguenze nella vita economica del peccato originale. Infatti problemi di opportunismo si creano anche nel contribuire a creare un \u201cbel clima aziendale\u201d, o uno spirito di squadra, non fosse altro perch\u00e9 la contribuzione pu\u00f2 essere asimmetrica, come si verifica in quelle comunit\u00e0 umane dove pochi danno molto, e molti danno poco: tutti godono del bel clima, partecipano, ma chi si prende la briga di organizzare la riunione di condominio, di portare i pasticcini, di spazzare alla fine della festa … sono spesso pochi, mentre tutti si divertono e stanno bene.<\/p>\n

Hanno dunque sbagliato gli autori a non trattare del problema del\u00a0free-riding<\/em>\u00a0nel loro modello? Non credo: forse \u00e8 bene che, nella divisione sociale della conoscenza, spetti agli economisti, i cultori della \u201cdismal science\u201d, di occuparsi dei \u201cfallimenti della vita in comune\u201d, e che i cultori delle scienze aziendali indichino strade per buone pratiche di gestione, con l\u2019obiettivo di prospettare sentieri di realizzazione e di felicit\u00e0 nella vita di un\u2019impresa (mi piace molto il riferimento alla felicit\u00e0 ampiamente presente nel libro).<\/p>\n

Un\u2019ultima considerazione relativa al tema del \u201cbene comune\u201d, centrale nella proposta nella\u00a0pars construens<\/em>\u00a0del libro. Gli autori, esperti conoscitori del pensiero teologico e filosofico, sono ben coscienti che il tema del \u201cbene comune\u201d \u00e8 tra i pi\u00f9 scivolosi e ricchi di insidie della storia del pensiero. Riconoscono infatti che l\u2019addentrarsi nel rapporto tra la ricerca dell\u2019interesse individuale (o del bene privato) e il bene comune \u00e8 stata l\u2019operazione pi\u00f9 difficile, ma pi\u00f9 importante, dell\u2019intero libro. La loro tesi, in linea con il pensiero della chiesa, \u00e8 che i soggetti nelle loro azioni abbiano direttamente in mente il bene comune, rifiutando quindi il pensiero molto comune che si esprime nel ragionamento \u201cio conosco solo quale sia il\u00a0mio<\/em>\u00a0bene\u201d.<\/p>\n

Personalmente non posso non essere d\u2019accordo con questa tesi di fondo, e condivido pienamente il loro atteggiamento metodologico. La domanda per\u00f2 rimane: come facciamo a sapere quale sia il bene comune in una determinata scelta individuale? E\u2019 infatti nota la diffidenza degli economisti nei confronti di questo tema, almeno da quando Adam Smith nel 1776 affermava: \u201cnon ho mai visto che molto bene sia stato fatto da coloro i quali ammettono di commerciare per il bene pubblico\u201d (La ricchezza delle nazioni<\/em>, libro quarto, cap. 2). Da qui la ricetta proposta dalla grande maggioranza degli economisti di puntare all\u2019interesse personale, e lasciare al mercato svolgere, come una \u201cmano invisibile\u201d, il convogliare quegli interessi particolari verso il bene comune, che arriverebbe come un bene non intenzionale.<\/p>\n

Oggi sono molti gli studiosi che si riconoscono nella tradizione inaugurata da Smith, in particolare i sostenitori dell\u2019approccio cosiddetto \u201caustriaco\u201d alle scienze sociali, i quali alla vecchia argomentazione smithiana aggiungono la tesi che la conoscenza \u00e8 limitata e quindi frazionata in infiniti brani, e ogni persona pu\u00f2 solo controllare un piccolissimo brandello di quella conoscenza, e operare in conformit\u00e0 con quella. Non potendo quindi conoscere, per limiti cognitivi, quale sia il bene comune, la cosa pi\u00f9 intelligente e utile che possiamo fare sarebbe quindi cercare di raggiungere il nostro bene privato, che possiamo conoscere con maggiore facilit\u00e0. Una tesi che seppure estremista non \u00e8 priva di un certo interesse, anche in considerazione del fatto che una posizione molto simile la ritroviamo anche in autori cristiani contemporanei di Smith, come Vico, Galiani o Genovesi.<\/p>\n

Questi pensatori, economisti e filosofi, sulla scia della tradizione soprattutto italiana della\u00a0vita civile<\/em>, pur negando che i vizi possano diventare di per s\u00e9 pubbliche virt\u00f9, riconoscevano una eterogenesi dei fini, e cio\u00e8 la presenza di un\u2019intelligenza divina, provvidenziale (l\u2019economista Ferdinando Galiani parlava di una \u201cSuprema Mano\u201d), che a dispetto delle intenzioni individuali, ordina al bene del tutto le passioni private.<\/p>\n

Scrive al riguardo il cristianissimo Vico nella sua\u00a0Scienza Nuova<\/em>: \u201cCome dalla ferocia, dell\u2019avarizia, dell\u2019ambizione, che sono gli tre vizi che portano a travverso tutto il genere umano, ne fa la milizia, la mercanzia e la corte, e s\u00ec la fortezza, l\u2019opulenza e la sapienza delle repubbliche; e di questi tre grandi vizi, i quali certamente distruggerebbero l\u2019umana generazione sopra la terra, ne fa la civile felicit\u00e0. Questa degnit\u00e0 pruova esservi provvidenza divina e che ella sia una divina mente legislatrice, la quale delle passioni degli uomini, tutti attenuti alle loro private utilit\u00e0, per le quali viverebbero da fiere bestie dentro le solitudini, ne ha fatto gli ordini civili per li quali viviamo in umana societ\u00e0 (1744, \u00a7\u00a7 132-133).<\/p>\n

In questo brano troviamo per\u00f2 qualcosa di pi\u00f9 rispetto alla teoria smithiana della mano invisibile: c\u2019\u00e8 qui l\u2019idea della \u201ccivile felicit\u00e0\u201d, vale a dire la tesi che\u00a0non sempre e non automaticamente gli interessi privati tendono al bene comune, ma solo dentro istituzioni civili e giuste<\/em>. Questa mi pare una tesi interessante anche nel discorso pi\u00f9 specifico di un\u2019impresa: un imprenditore, un manager o un lavoratore pu\u00f2 avere una buona guida all\u2019azione quando persegue i suoi interessi privati all\u2019interno di istituzioni civili e giuste, quando paga le tasse, non inquina, d\u00e0 il salario pattuito ai lavorati, esegue con diligenza le prestazioni previste dai contratti.<\/p>\n

Basta quindi cercare con correttezza e onest\u00e0 il proprio interesse per operare verso il bene comune? Non credo, queste condizioni sono per\u00f2 condizioni minimali che in una societ\u00e0 civile giusta ci danno buone garanzie per pensare che un imprenditore nel fare il suo lavoro particolare sta, di fatto, edificando anche il bene comune.<\/p>\n

Quando le istituzioni civili e giuste non esistono (pensiamo a chi opera in contesti istituzionali non civili e non democratici), e soprattutto in tutte quelle scelte quotidiane che non potranno mai essere regolate dai contratti (la scienza economica ci dice che le organizzazioni umane nascano proprio perch\u00e9 i contratti non sono sufficienti, falliscono) la ricerca del bene comune pu\u00f2 richiedere qualcosa di\u00a0pi\u00f9\u00a0<\/em>o di\u00a0diverso<\/em>\u00a0rispetto all\u2019interesse particolare: e qui entrano in gioco le dinamiche del dono, della gratuit\u00e0, in una parola, dell\u2019amore, una categoria quasi del tutto aliena alla scienza economica, che invece, almeno nella ricca impostazione che ho trovato nel libro di Alford e Naughton, sembrano trovare il loro spazio nelle scienze dell\u2019organizzazione aziendale.<\/p>\n

Allora ben venga una contaminazione e una fertilizzazione reciproche, una esigenza che avverto come urgente, e di cui questa mia nota vorrebbe essere un\u2019espressione.<\/p>\n

\u00a01<\/sup>\u00a0Si potrebbe anche discutere se sia davvero cos\u00ec necessaria la gerarchia di bisogni di Maslow: l\u2019antropologia, e importanti momenti della vita di ciascuno di noi (penso ad esempio all\u2019infanzia, alla malattia o ad altri momenti \u201cforti\u201d) ci dicono che mentre si pu\u00f2 anche sopravvivere a lungo vestiti male e denutriti, non si vive senza significati e rapporti con gli altri.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Management and the Primacy of Prudence<\/strong><\/p>\n

David W. Lutz<\/em><\/p>\n

Among the virtues of Helen Alford and Michael Naughton\u2019s\u00a0Managing as if Faith Mattered<\/em>\u00a0is the central role that it assigns to the cardinal virtues. Furthermore, while most works in this field focus almost exclusively on justice, Alford and Naughton recognise and emphasise that possession of the first cardinal virtue, prudence, is the necessary and sufficient condition for possessing the other cardinal virtues:<\/p>\n

Prudence is at once a virtue, that is, a mode of human effectiveness, and the condition for our acquisition and exercise of other virtues. Prudence is our power to recognize and direct our thinking and decision making to the good here and now. Without the ability to make good decisions, we cannot hope to deal fairly with others (justice) or to use wisely our affective and aggressive drives (temperance and courage) (p. 108).<\/p>\n

The mainstream of contemporary \u201cbusiness ethics\u201d has forgotten that prudence is a virtue at all. This is a consequence of the historical transformation of the virtues into \u201cpassions\u201d or \u201csentiments.\u201d While the virtues cannot conflict with one another, the passions can and often do. Prudence became egoistic and an opponent of the altruistic passions. In a paper presented at the Second World Congress of the International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics in 2000, Eugene Heath cites Adam Smith, one of the principal deconstructors of the virtue of prudence:<\/p>\n

Prudence, in short, when directed merely to the care of the health, of the fortune, and of the rank and reputation of the individual, though it is regarded as a most respectable and even, in some degree, as an amiable and agreeable quality, yet it never is considered as one, either of the most endearing, or of the most ennobling of the virtues. It commands a certain cold esteem, but seems not entitled to any very ardent love or admiration.\u00a01<\/sup><\/p>\n

Within the tradition of the cardinal virtues, however, prudence directed merely to the care of the health, fortune, rank, and reputation of the individual is not true prudence. Heath then follows Smith in contrasting prudence to the \u201cvirtue of benevolence\u201d:<\/p>\n

I will draw on Smith\u2019s account of sympathy (and the sympathetic imagination) to show how personal knowledge and acquaintance are determin-ative of the kinds of moral concern typical of personal and benevolent relations; where such knowledge and acquaintance are lacking, there will be a diminished expectation of benevolence and a greater emphasis on prudence.\u00a02<\/sup><\/p>\n

Alford and Naughton, in refreshing contrast to the business ethics mainstream, do not accept this contrast between prudence and concern for other persons: \u201cPrudence involves engaging our whole capacity for action, emotion, and will alike, toward the common good as the controlling end in our decision making\u201d (p. 90). And this is consistent with St. Thomas: \u201cSince it belongs to prudence rightly to counsel, judge, and command concerning the means of obtaining a due end, it is evident that prudence regards not only the private good of the individual, but also the common good of the multitude.\u201d\u00a03<\/sup><\/p>\n

The modern restriction of prudence to self-regarding decisions is particularly unfortunate in the context of business management. Decision making is the most characteristic function of the manager. And prudence is the virtue of decision making. In the words of Alford and Naughton: \u201cPrudence concerns something familiar to all managers: good decision making\u201d (p. 90). If prudence were not concerned with the common good, managers concerned with promoting the common good would have to rely on some other virtue. Thus the dominance of justice in modern business ethics. As Alford and Naughton recognise, however, justice alone is insufficient: \u201cJustice without prudence (organising the appropriate means) is merely an exercise in moralism, which cannot deliver on its promise\u201d (p. 137).<\/p>\n

Since prudence does in fact regard the common good of the multitude, St. Thomas\u2019s detailed analysis of the first cardinal virtue can be applied to the context of managerial decision-making. Alford and Naughton write: \u201cA prudent manager can see the big picture in all its aspects and constraints, and knows how to apply the rules in each specific situation\u201d (p. 90). But while this is true of situations in which there are rules that can be applied, the fully prudent manager can do even more than this.<\/p>\n

In discussing the \u201cadjunct virtues\u201d or \u201cquasi-potential parts\u201d of the virtue of\u00a0prudentia<\/em>, St. Thomas distinguishes between\u00a0synesis<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0gnome<\/em>.\u00a0Synesis<\/em>\u00a0is involved in making sound judgements in situations where the rules apply. But the reason management is such a challenging and demanding profession is that there are many situations in which the rules do not apply. Although Thomas does not provide an example from business management, he alludes to one that Plato offers in a different context:<\/p>\n

Suppose that a friend when in his right mind has deposited arms with me and he asks for them when he is not in his right mind, ought I to give them back to him? No one would say that I ought or that I should be right in doing so, any more than they would say that I ought always to speak the truth to one who is in this condition.\u00a04<\/sup><\/p>\n

Although Joseph Fletcher\u2019s version of \u201csituation ethics\u201d\u00a05<\/sup>\u00a0is erroneous, prudential judgement does depend upon the situation in which it is made. Property should be returned to its rightful owner \u2013 but not always. Thomas explains that\u00a0gnome<\/em>\u00a0enables the person who possesses it to make prudential judgements in situations where the rules do not apply:<\/p>\n

Now it happens sometimes that something has to be done which is not covered by the common rules of actions, for instance in the case of the enemy of one\u2019s country, when it would be wrong to give him back his deposit, or in other similar cases. Hence it is necessary to judge of such matters according to higher principles than the common laws, according to which synesis judges: and corresponding to such higher principles it is necessary to have a higher virtue of judgment, which is called\u00a0gnome<\/em>, and which denotes a certain discrimination in judgment.\u201d\u00a06<\/sup><\/p>\n

It is precisely this certain discrimination in judgement that distinguishes the excellent, virtuous, prudent manager from the common manager. Executives are often confronted with situations in which either the rules do not apply or there are no rules \u00a0to apply. The greater the scope of their responsibility, the more frequent and more complex are such situations. Alford and Naughton recognise this. For example, after offering several steps to take in determining just wages, they add: \u201cThese steps are not a recipe for the solution of the problem of just pay. They will not create a beatific vision of \u2018pay nirvana.\u2019 They will not relieve managers of their burdens, and may even multiply them\u201d (p. 151). No matter how many steps, rules, guidelines, or secrets of success a manager has at his disposal, achieving justice often requires the virtue of\u00a0prudentia<\/em>\u00a0and its adjunct virtue\u00a0gnome<\/em>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

1<\/sup>\u00a0Adam Smith,\u00a0The Theory of Moral Sentiments<\/em>\u00a0(London: A. Millar, 1759), VI.i.14.<\/p>\n

2<\/sup>\u00a0Eugene Heath, \u201cAdam Smith on Benevolence and Commerce: A New View from an Old Guide,\u201d Second World Congress of the International Society of Business, Economics, and Ethics, S\u00e3o Paulo, Brazil, 19-23 July 2000.<\/p>\n

3<\/sup>\u00a0Thomas Aquinas,\u00a0Summa Theologica<\/em>, IIa IIae, 47, 10, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province.<\/p>\n

4<\/sup>\u00a0Plato,\u00a0Republic<\/em>, 331C, trans. Benjamin Jowett.<\/p>\n

5<\/sup>\u00a0Joseph Fletcher,\u00a0Situation Ethics: The New Morality<\/em>\u00a0(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966).<\/p>\n

6<\/sup>\u00a0Thomas Aquinas,\u00a0Summa Theologica<\/em>, IIa IIae, 51, 4.<\/p>","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_lmt_disableupdate":"no","_lmt_disable":"no"},"autori":[895,942],"fascicolo":[51],"class_list":["post-1016","articolo","type-articolo","status-publish","hentry","autori-helen-alford","autori-michael-j-naughton","fascicolo-febbraio-2002"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nOikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Oikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Oikonomia\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-04-12T17:10:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/hrm1.gif\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"40 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/\",\"name\":\"Oikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/hrm1.gif\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-02-01T12:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-04-12T17:10:41+00:00\",\"description\":\"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/hrm1.gif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/hrm1.gif\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/2002\\\/febbraio\\\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Articoli Rivista\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/articolo\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Oikonomia\",\"description\":\"Rivista di Etica e Scienze Sociali Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Oikonomia - Rivista di etica e scienze sociali \\\/ Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/logo_oikonomia-nero.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/03\\\/logo_oikonomia-nero.png\",\"width\":500,\"height\":500,\"caption\":\"Oikonomia - Rivista di etica e scienze sociali \\\/ Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.oikonomia.it\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Oikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization","description":"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"Oikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization","og_description":"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/","og_site_name":"Oikonomia","article_modified_time":"2026-04-12T17:10:41+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/hrm1.gif","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Estimated reading time":"40 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/","url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/","name":"Oikonomia - Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/hrm1.gif","datePublished":"2002-02-01T12:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-04-12T17:10:41+00:00","description":"Leggi l'articolo a cura di Helen Alford, Michael J. Naughton, pubblicato nel numero di Febbraio 2002. Disponibile in formato PDF.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/hrm1.gif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/hrm1.gif"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/2002\/febbraio\/managing-as-if-faith-mattered-christian-social-principles-in-the-modern-organization\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Articoli Rivista","item":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/articolo\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Managing As If Faith Mattered Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/","name":"Oikonomia","description":"Rivista di Etica e Scienze Sociali Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#organization","name":"Oikonomia - Rivista di etica e scienze sociali \/ Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences","url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/logo_oikonomia-nero.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/logo_oikonomia-nero.png","width":500,"height":500,"caption":"Oikonomia - Rivista di etica e scienze sociali \/ Journal of Ethics & Social Sciences"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articolo\/1016","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articolo"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/articolo"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1016"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"autori","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/autori?post=1016"},{"taxonomy":"fascicolo","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oikonomia.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/fascicolo?post=1016"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}