Abstract
In recent times, representatives of American management science have been arguing increasingly for a functionalization of ethics to change economic thinking: what they are seeking is the systematic integration of ethics into the economic paradigm. Using the insights developed by Hirschman, I would like to show how one must first expose the rhetoric of those critics of change (referred to below as conservatives or reactionaries) in order then to implement that which is new (representatives of this approach are referred to below as progressives). Such an ‹unmasking’ works particularly well when one can defuse the arguments of the reactionaries – which is precisely what one achieves by strategically integrating ethics into economics. In his work The Rhetoric of Reaction Hirschman examines three basic forms of reactionary thought: the perversity thesis, the futility thesis, and the jeopardy thesis. According to the perversity thesis, intended goals are transformed into their opposites. The futility thesis argues that the setting of goals is useless since history runs its own course independent of those goals. The jeopardy thesis claims to preserve what already exists since change might substantially endanger that which has already been achieved. The importance of Hirschman’s ideas for the strategic interplay between the academic disciplines can be seen quite clearly in the example of German business ethics. This will be displayed below with reference to Hirschman’s three theses. Finally, implications will be drawn for business ethics in general and for management theory in particular.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Apel K.-O. (1990) Diskursethik als Verantwortungsethik und das Problem der ökonomischen Rationalität. In: B. Biervert, K. Held, J. Wieland (eds), Sozialphilosophische Grundlagen ökonomischen Handelns. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M., pp 270–305
Baumol, W.J. 1991 (Almost) Perfect Competition (Contestability) and Business Ethics. In W. J. Baumol, S. A. Batey Blackwell (eds), Perfect Markets and Easy Virtue. Business Ethics and the Invisible Hand. Blackwell, Cambridge, MA, pp. 1–23.
Birsch, D. (1990) The Failure of Friedman’s Agency Argument. In J. R. DesJardins, J. J. McCall (eds), Contemporary Issues in Business Ethics, 2nd ed. Wadsworth Publishing Co, Belmont, CA, pp. 28–36.
Bishop, J.D. (1995). ‹Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand Argument’. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(3), 165–180. doi:10.1007/BF00881431
Bowie, N.E. 1999, Business Ethics: A Kantian Perspective. Blackwell Publishers, Malden, MA.
Breuer, M., Brink, A., & Schumann, O.J. 2003, Wirtschaftsethik als kritische Sozialwissenschaft. Haupt, Bern et al.
Carroll, A.B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
Carroll, A.B. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility Evolution of a Definitional Construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303
Carroll, A.B., & Buchholtz, A.K. 2003, Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management, (Southwestern Publishing, Cincinnati, OH).
Crane, A., & Matten, D. 2007, Business Ethics: A European Perspective, (Oxford University Press, New York).
De George, R.T. 1982, Business Ethics, (Macmillan, New York).
Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T.W. 1999, Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics, (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA).
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L.E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. doi:10.2307/258887
Evan, W.M., & Freeman, R.E. 1993 A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation: Kantian Capitalism. In T.L. Beauchamp, N. E. Bowie (eds) Ethical Theory and Business. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 97–106.
Freeman, R.E. 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. (Pitman, Boston, MA).
Freeman, R.E. (1994). The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421. doi:10.2307/3857340
Freeman, R. E.: 2004, ‹The Stakeholder Approach Revisited’, Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik 5(3), 228–241.
Freeman, R.E., Velamuri, S.R. 2006, A New Approach to CSR: Company Stakeholder Responsibility. In: A. Kakabadse, M. Morsing (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility. Reconciling Aspiration with Application.(Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke et al., pp 9–23.
Freeman, R.E., Wicks, A.C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder Theory and the “Corporate Objective Revisited”. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369. doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0066
French, P.A. 1995, Corporate Ethics, (Harcourt Brace College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX).
French, W.A., & Kimmell, S. 2000, ‹Business Ethics and Discourse Ethics: Germanic Roots with Intercultural Applications. In P. Koslowski (eds.), Contemporary Economic Ethics and Business Ethics. Springer, Berlin, pp 193–209.
Frey, B.S. 1997, Moral und ökonomische Anreize: Der Verdrängungseffekt. In R. Hegselmann, H. Kliemt (eds.) Moral und Interesse. Oldenbourg, München, pp 111–132.
Friedman, M. 1963, Capitalism and Freedom. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Friedman, M.: 1970, ‹The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits’, New York Times Magazine, September 13.
Friedman, M. 1979, ‹The Social Responsibility of Business’, in T. L. Beauchamp and N. E. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business, (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 136–138.
Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad Management Theories are Destroying Good Management Practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.
Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for Practice: A Critique of the Transaction Cost Theory. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 13–47. doi:10.2307/258627
Göbel, E. 2006, Unternehmensethik, (Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart).
Grant, C. (1991). Friedman Fallacies. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(12), 907–914. doi:10.1007/BF00383796
Habermas, J.: 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action, translated by Thomas McCarthy (Polity, Cambridge, MA).
Habermas, J. 1991, Erläuterungen zur Diskursethik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a M
Harpes, J. P. and W. Kuhlmann (eds.): 1997, Zur Relevanz der Diskursethik. Anwendungsprobleme der Diskursethik in Wirtschaft und Politik (Lit, Münster et al.).
Hirschman, A.O. 1991, The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity Futility Jeopardy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Homann, K. 1994, ‹Marktwirtschaft und Unternehmensethik’, in Forum für Philosophie Bad Homburg (ed.), Markt und Moral Die Diskussion um die Unternehmensethik (Haupt, Bern et al.), pp. 109–130.
Homann, K., & Blome-Drees, F. 1992, Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik, (Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, Göttingen).
Husted, B.W., & Allen, D.B. (2000). Is It Ethical to Use Ethics as Strategy? Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 21–31. doi:10.1023/A:1006422704548
Jeurissen, R.J.M. (2000). The Social Function of Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(4), 821–843. doi:10.2307/3857835
Küpper, H.-U. 2006, Unternehmensethik: Hintergründe, Konzepte, Anwendungsbereiche, (Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart).
Maak, T., & Ulrich, P. 2007, Integre Unternehmensführung. Ethisches Orientierungswissen für die Wirtschaftspraxis, (Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart).
Mandeville, B.: 1714/1988, The Fable of the Bees or Private Vices, Publick Benefits (Liberty Classics, IN).
Marshall, T.H. 1965, Class, Citizenship and Social Development: Essays, (Doubleday & Company, Garden City, NY).
Mayer-Faje, A. and P. Ulrich (eds.): 1991, Der andere Adam Smith – Beiträge zur Neubestimmung von Ökonomie als Politischer Ökonomie (Haupt, Bern et al.).
Merton, R.K. (1936). The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action. American Sociological Review, 1(6), 894–904. doi:10.2307/2084615
Pack, Sp. J. (1997). Adam Smith on the Virtues: A Partial Resolution of the Adam Smith Problem. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 19(1), 127–140.
Phillips, R.A. (1997). Stakeholder Theory and a Principle of Fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(1), 51–66. doi:10.2307/3857232
Phillips, R., R. E. Freeman and A. C. Wicks: 2003, ‹What Stakeholder Theory is Not’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4), 479–502.
Porter, M.E. (1987). From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 65(3), 43–59.
Porter, M.E. 1990, The Competitive Advantage of Nations, (Free Press, New York).
Porter, M. E. and M. R. Kramer: 2003, ‹The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’, in Harvard Business Review (ed.), Harvard Business Review on Corporate Responsibility (Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA), pp. 27–64.
Rappaport, A. (1981). Selecting Strategies that Create Shareholder Value. Harvard Business Review, 59(3), 139–149.
Rappaport, A. 1999 Creating Shareholder Value The New Standard for Business Performance 2nd ed. Free Press, New York.
Reese-Schäfer, W. 2006, Albert Hirschmans Studie zur “Rhetorik der Reaktion”. In I. Pies, M. Leschke (eds), Albert Hirschmans grenzüberschreitende Ökonomie. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, pp 143–160.
Scherer, A.G., & Patzer, M. (Eds.). 2008, Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensethik. (Gabler, Wiesbaden).
Schneider, D. (1990). ‹Unternehmensethik und Gewinnprinzip in der Betriebswirtschaftslehre’, Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche. Forschung, 42(10), 869–891.
Schneider, D. (1991). ‹Wird Betriebswirtschaftslehre durch Kritik an Unternehmensethik unverantwortlich?. Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 43(6), 537–543.
Shaw, B. 1988, ‹A Reply to Thomas Mulligan’s Critique of Milton Friedman’s Essay ′Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. in Journal of Business Ethics 7(7), 537–543.
Smith, A.: 1759/2004, Theorie der ethischen Gefühle, edited and translated by W. Eckstein (Meiner, Hamburg).
Smith, A.: 1776/1996, Der Wohlstand der Nationen. Eine Untersuchung seiner Natur und seiner Ursachen, edited and translated by H. C. Recktenwald (Beck, München).
Smith, C.W. (1994). The New Corporate Philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 72(3), 105–116.
Steinmann, H., & Löhr, A. 1994, Grundlagen der Unternehmensethik, (Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart).
Steinmann, H., & Löhr, A. 1996 A Republican Concept of Corporate Ethics. In: Urban S. (eds) Europe’s Challenge Economic Efficiency and Social Solidarity. Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp. 21–60
Suchanek, A. 2001, Ökonomische Ethik, (Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen).
Ulrich, P. 1990, ‹Der kritische Adam Smith im Spannungsfeld zwischen sittlichem Gefühl und ethischer Vernunft. Universität St. Gallen, St Gallen
Ulrich, P. 1993, Transformation der ökonomischen Vernunft. Fortschrittsperspektiven der modernen Industriegesellschaft, 3rd Edition (Haupt, Bern et al)
Ulrich, P. 2008, Integrative Economic Ethics: Foundations of a Civilized Market Economy, translated by James Fearns (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA).
Velasquez, M. G. 1992, Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
Werhane, P.H. 1985, Persons, Rights, and Corporations, (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
Wilson, J.Q. (1989). Adam Smith on Business Ethics. California Management Review, 32(1), 59–72.
Zsolnai L., Ims, K.J. (Eds). 2006 Business Within Limits: Deep Ecology and Buddhist Economics. Lang, Oxford et al
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brink, A. Hirschman’s Rhetoric of Reaction: U.S. and German Insights in Business Ethics. J Bus Ethics 89, 109–122 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9988-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9988-5