Here is the Syllabus and Schedule [pdf] for my Business and Economic Ethics course this Fall 2010 semester. The syllabus and schedule, along with a supplemental reading booklet, are also posted in the Courses section of this site.
And here are some of my publications and posts that are relevant to this semester’s material:
My review of Kevin Gibson’s Ethics and Business: An Introduction (Cambridge University Press, 2007) is now out in the current issue of Teaching Philosophy. The review is behind the subscriber wall but will be publicly available eventually.
From my introductory section:
“Gibson’s approach is middle-of-the-road in the content of his beliefs about business and ethics, so this is a mainstream publication. As such Ethics and Business embodies the strengths of the mainstream—and a few of its weaknesses. So from the perspective of someone outside the mainstream, let me indicate what I take those weaknesses to be in the context of reviewing a textbook written for students. …”
Posted 2 weeks, 3 days ago at 9:11 am. Add a comment
Here is a nice solution to a problem. City governments are usually responsible for street signs. But they can be expensive–and this is an era of supposed budget cuts, it’s hard to impose new taxes, and so on. So why not get area businesses to sponsor the signs? Businesses will pay happily to get some marketing presence, the city gets new signs at less cost to them, and everyone benefits.
But I showed the pictures briefly to a colleague, who frowned and said Más dominación por corporaciones, which I translate loosely as More goddamn big businesses asserting their control over our lives by polluting our public places with their insidious messages. And foreign corporations to boot. Or something like that.
My colleague’s reaction was automatic, but built into it is the idea that a better solution would be to force everyone to pay for the signs through taxes. That would eliminate the advertising, and the businesses would receive no benefit from their imposed tax costs. That is to say, my colleague believes implicitly that a compulsory win/lose solution is preferable to a voluntary win/win solution.
All of which makes me wonder how some people become so invested in adversarial ideologies that they so automatically reject any suggestion of the mutually beneficial.
Posted 2 weeks, 6 days ago at 9:34 am. Add a comment
I’m giving two talks later this week in historic Alexandria, Virginia, at the Free Minds 2010 conference, co-sponsored by The Atlas Society and the Free Minds Institute.
On Friday I’ll speak on “Ayn Rand’s Entrepreneurial Ethic,” and on Saturday I’ll speak on “CEE’s Mission and Strategy.”
John Allison recently retired as Chairman and CEO of BB&T Bank. During his 20-year tenure as CEO, BB&T’s assets grew from $4.5 billion to $136.5 billion. Almost more impressively, BB&T has weathered the financial storms of the last few years comfortably and remains healthy and one of the largest banks in the nation.
Allison has produced a 1:10-hour video lecture on the financial crisis. He brings to it his insider’s expert knowledge on banking practices, government monetary policy and regulation over the last few decades, and his first-hand participation in leading BB&T through the complicated economic and political realities as the financial meltdown began. Well worth your time.
Last year BusinessWeek magazine ranked Loyola University Chicago’s Business Ethics program Number One in the Country.
So it is an honor to be part of the team as an adjunct professor this summer teaching the MBA course in Business Ethics (and to be able to enjoy LUC’s dynamic Water Tower location in beautiful downtown Chicago).
LUC’s prominence is due to its faculty, whom I know mostly through their publications:
Al Gini and Alexei Marcoux are joint authors of widely-used textbook in the field, Case Studies in Business Ethics, now in its sixth edition.
In my field of business ethics I regularly read or hear condemnations of the great power of business corporations in the modern world.
Witness Warren Buffett. Buffett is the third richest man in the world and head of the powerhouse Berkshire Hathaway corporation. I am not a fan of his political or economic views, but Buffett’s recent newsworthiness is instructive.
Recently, Buffett was asked by Wendy Edelberg to come to Washington to share his thoughts on a variety of financial matters. Buffett twice declined the invitation. Edelberg decided she would not take No for answer, and now Buffett has been subpoenaed.
Who is Wendy Edelberg? She is Executive Director of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, a government body charged with investigating the financial crisis. As a government official in that position, she has the power to send a message to Buffett that begins with the words “YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear and give testimony.” And if Buffett does not, the police will soon appear at his door.
Suppose the “invitation” had gone the other way: Imagine that Warren Buffett had asked Wendy Edelberg to come to Omaha to share her views about stuff. Suppose Edelberg had replied that she was too busy or otherwise did not want to. What could Buffett have done about that? Absolutely nothing. Buffett, despite his great wealth, has no power to compel anyone to do anything.
But a mid-level government bureaucrat can force the world’s third richest man to come to her.
Edelberg’s and the FCIC’s lawyer wrote to Buffett: “We would prefer not to use compulsory process to secure your cooperation.” Not surprisingly, they were able to overcome their reluctance.
So for those who mutter darkly about the power of corporations: please keep in mind where the coercive power really lies.
Economic power is a genuine power, but its power is limited by the voluntary choices of the parties involved in the transaction. I could offer you a million dollars to shave your eyebrows and declare your love for Immanuel Kant on YouTube. You could accept or not.
Political power is different. It is the power to compel others, and it does not require the consent of all of the parties.
Of course it’s a common phenomenon in mixed economies for some wealthy individuals or corporations to use their economic power to influence the political process, and sometimes that is a bad thing. But even here remember what makes that possible: either corrupt politicians who accept bribes or politicians, corrupt or mistaken, who politicize the economy in the first place.
We need to move in the direction of separating politics and economics, for exactly the same reasons we separated politics and religion.
Posted 3 months, 1 week ago at 1:06 pm. 5 comments
The Syllabus and Schedule [pdf] for the MBA Business Ethics course I’ll be teaching this summer at Loyola University Chicago is now available in the Courses section of my site.
Posted 3 months, 1 week ago at 12:21 pm. Add a comment
Here is the Syllabus and Schedule [pdf] for my Business and Economic Ethics course this Fall 2010 semester. The syllabus and schedule, along with a supplemental reading booklet, are also posted in the Courses section of this site. 
My review of Kevin Gibson’s Ethics and Business: An Introduction (Cambridge University Press, 2007) is now out in 
Last year BusinessWeek magazine ranked Loyola University Chicago’s Business Ethics program 
Al Gini and Alexei Marcoux are joint authors of widely-used textbook in the field, 
