- A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
- Learn more
Preview content only
Content available from Journal of Business Ethics
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Journal of Business Ethics (2019) 159:39–57
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3755-4
ORIGINAL PAPER
A Humanistic Perspective forManagement Theory: Protecting Dignity
andPromoting Well‑Being
MichaelPirson1
Received: 19 April 2017 / Accepted: 23 November 2017 / Published online: 12 December 2017
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2017
Abstract
The notion of dignity as that which has intrinsic value has arguably been neglected in economics and management despite its
societal importance and eminent relevance in other social sciences. While management theory gained parsimony, this paper
argues that the inclusion of dignity in the theoretical precepts of management theory will: (a) improve management theory
in general, (b) align it more directly with the public interest, and (c) strengthen its connection to social welfare creation. The
paper outlines the notion of dignity, discusses its historical understanding, and explains its relevance in the context of man-
agement theory. Furthermore, it proposes a framework of paradigmatic assumptions along two dimensions: (a) understanding
human dignity as unconditional or conditional and (b) understanding social welfare as wealth creation or well-being creation.
I propose alternative management theory archetypes and discuss these archetypes’ theoretical implications for management
research. I also suggest how management theory can be shifted to contribute toward social welfare creation more directly.
Keywords Humanistic management· Economism· Humanism· Dignity· Well-being
“The general objective of the
Academy shall be therefore
to foster: a) a philosophy of
management that will make
possible the accomplishment
of the economic and social
objectives of an industrial
society with increasing economy
and effectiveness: the public’s
interests must be paramount in
any such philosophy, but adequate
consideration must be given to the
legitimate interests of capital and
labor…..”
Editor’s preface, Journal of the
Academy of Management, 1958,
1(1): 5–6.
Introduction
Despite the Academy of Management’s (AOM) mission and
objective to “foster [] a philosophy of management” that
serves “the public’s interests” (Editors 1958) management
scholarship’ contribution to the public good has arguably
been neglected (Walsh etal. 2003). Already 20years ago
AOM’s then president, Donald Hambrick, remarked about
the lack of relevance of AOM’s work to society (Hambrick
1994). This tendency has been bemoaned with increasing
frequency (Aguinis and Pierce 2008; Hambrick 1994; Pir-
son and Lawrence 2010; Waddock 2015, 2016; Walsh etal.
2003), because very few contributions discuss managerial
solutions to environmental degradation, the dangers of cli-
mate change, or increasing social inequities1 (Hahn etal.
2010; Hambrick 1994). Witnessing this lack and the inabil-
ity of current theorists to develop cohesive and substantive
answers leads some to argue that we are experiencing a prel-
ude to a paradigm change (Anderson 1998; Kuhn 1996).
Since we cannot satisfactorily address the current problems
with the theories at our disposal, management scholars have
long been called to re-conceptualize their basic, paradig-
matic assumptions (Ghoshal 2005; Gladwin etal. 1995;
* Michael Pirson
pirson@fordham.edu
1 Fordham University, 45 Columbus Avenue, NewYork,
NY10023, USA
1 See, for example, http://www.gabriel-zucman.eu/files/SaezZuc-
man2014.pdf.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.