Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Briton Opiyo]

This shift raises a pivotal question: How can we reintegrate the values of balance and ethical reflection championed by Aristotle and Confucius in professional environments increasingly governed by efficiency and profit motives?

However we would attempt to do it, it certainly is
not going to be easy, convenient, pleasant, or profitable.

I see a need for radical painful sacrifices.

But we should try and put such attempt in the widest perspective
that, ultimately, we will die rather sooner than later,
and our life is a kind of "once-in-a-lifetime opportunity"
to follow our heart's bravest dreams.

Your acknowledgment of the inherent challenges in this endeavor is both realistic and insightful. You rightly point out that reintegrating values like balance and ethical reflection in today's professional environments is neither easy nor convenient. This suggests a fundamental clash between traditional values and modern business practices. What specific challenges do you see in trying to bridge this gap? How can organizations and individuals navigate the tension between efficiency-driven goals and the slower, more reflective pace of ethical deliberation?

The notion of "radical painful sacrifices" is quite striking. It implies a deep commitment to higher values, even at the cost of personal or organizational comfort. In your view, what kind of sacrifices might be necessary to achieve this balance? Are these sacrifices more of a personal nature, or do they extend to organizational structures and cultures?

Your reference to the fleeting nature of life and the importance of pursuing our "heart's bravest dreams" introduces an existential dimension to the discussion. It raises a philosophical question: How does our awareness of mortality influence our professional choices and the values we uphold in our work? In your experience, does this awareness encourage a greater focus on ethical reflection and balance, or does it drive a pursuit of efficiency and profit due to the limited time we have?

It's common to want to learn from your parents' mistakes in parenting. Focus on communication, empathy, and setting clear boundaries to create a positive and supportive environment for your own children.

[Stoppelmann]

Since you have provided many valuable points in your response, I would like to categorize them under several subtopics (as I see) and give my opinion on them.

1. Leadership and Ethical Culture: Your experience with a CEO who championed an ethical culture is a perfect example of how leadership can positively influence an organization. Effective leaders can inspire ethical behavior by embodying the values they preach. A leader who actively demonstrates a commitment to ethics can foster an environment where employees feel valued and understood, contrasting sharply with a solely efficiency-driven approach.

Yes, that is exactly how I experienced him, and the positive impulse we took from the workshop sent waves out into the corporation. The problem seems to be that, for a grassroots movement to grow, we need many people ready to lead in this way. The energy we needed was given by the momentum we received, which can work in a properly structured organisation, which is waiting for that impulse. Still, to begin afresh is a long process.

When I stepped down from the regional management position and took over a house where this development hadn’t been experienced, the impulse that went out from me quickly began to seep away, and the new authoritarian attitude spread, which dogged my progress. Ultimately, losing my enthusiasm, I chose retirement, just as others had taken on new jobs, and all the excitement was forgotten.

2. Ethical Decision-Making and Corporate Responsibility: Your approach in incorporating CSR and ethical guidelines reflects a growing awareness in the business world that profit and ethics aren't mutually exclusive. Companies are increasingly recognizing that sustainable success requires a balance between financial goals and social responsibilities. Ethical practices can lead to long-term benefits, including brand loyalty and a positive corporate image.

There are indeed companies that I hear are employing such guidelines, but they are mostly those where a lot of money is being made, such as in Information Technology. However, my son worked for a few larger companies and is now a freelance consultant for such firms (including where he previously worked) because he found it unbearable. He complained about the lack of leadership, and although ethical norms are upheld, there is a lack of productivity. Outside the companies, he could produce more and earn more simultaneously whilst being his own boss.

3. Work-Life Balance and Employee Well-being: The emphasis you placed on work-life balance is crucial. Research has consistently shown that employees who enjoy a good balance are more productive, engaged, and loyal. In a technocratic environment, this becomes a challenge, but also an opportunity for innovation in workplace policies and culture.

We have one of these companies close to us and a neighbour who works as service personnel for the “code-crunchers,” who she says live in fun and frolics and are served anything that keeps them productive. My son informed me that this is done for as long as profits are being made and the customers are happy, but some large corporations lose the principles of quality management out of sight, and the tail wags the dog. Ultimately, such corporations tend to close departments rather than attempt to bring them back in line.

So, we see that moderation and balance are necessary, and I believe this is also a Confucian principle of parenting and, therefore, plays a role in society. Maintaining a balance between individuals and their social roles, such as ruler and subject, parent and child, husband and wife, and even elder and younger sibling, is discussed controversially in the West, in which extremes come to bear that cause societal imbalance. That is, I think, a huge problem of the West and one of the reasons we have difficulty with the integration of refugees and immigrants, whose lives are often built on principles (good or bad) and who see the lack of principles as a character weakness.

4. Resisting Authoritarianism in Business Practices: Drawing parallels between technocratic business practices and authoritarian regimes is a powerful observation. It reminds us that businesses need to nurture a culture of openness and diversity. Encouraging different perspectives and fostering an inclusive environment can be antidotes to authoritarian tendencies.

Authoritarian tactics are rarely successful but can cause the business environment to degenerate so much that customers are lost. It is also often overlooked, and its effects are long-term, so it may be too late in the end to turn things back around. The main reason I have found why authoritarian measures are adopted seems to be the lack of principles in the workforce, and the severity is intended to compensate for that.

In this way, the workforce sometimes creates the problems they suffer. This is not always the case, but having been a manager and experienced this problem, I think it is more often than people think. My solution was to present the workers with both sides of the problem and try to induce a balance by awareness, whereas my managerial colleagues struggled to control their staff. As a regional manager, I successfully employed my strategy in houses where this problem arose.

5. The Role of Individual and Collective Action: Your belief in the power of resistance from the bottom-up resonates with historical movements where change was driven by grassroots efforts. Individual commitment, when combined, can lead to significant societal shifts. It's a reminder that change often starts with small, personal commitments that gather momentum.

As discussed, the problem is a lack of context or framework for activating such principles. In a work environment, it is easier than in a broader society, where we need some means of advocacy, whether in a religious or political group or activism of some kind, in which such a context is given. At the moment, as we have said, such groups tend towards extreme positions, and a policy of the Golden Mean is considered boring.

6. The Potential for a Countermovement: The countermovement you envision, rooted in integrity and community, is more than an ideal; it's a necessity in today's world. Such movements start small but can grow through consistent efforts and the power of example. They remind us that in a world often focused on short-term gains, long-term well-being hinges on ethical depth and balance.

These reflections add to your insightful observations. I'm curious to know how you see these ideas being implemented in real-world scenarios, especially in light of your experiences. What practical steps do you think can be taken to foster such a change in the corporate world?

As I think it is easy to observe, we need a movement that begins in the family before advancing to change the corporate world. It is in the families that the foundational work must be done, and this would have a widespread effect, even as far-reaching as in international relations. However, postmodernism challenges the idea of overarching, grand narratives claiming universal truths. The Golden Mean and Confucianism, emphasising a moral and social order, can be seen as presenting a grand narrative. Postmodernism, in contrast, tends to question such totalising perspectives and encourages an appreciation for multiple, diverse viewpoints.

The problem is that cohesion and alignment, ensuring a common direction of effort towards common goals, is difficult to ascertain. Multiple, diverse viewpoints can assist in developing goals, but once a goal has been agreed upon, we need a concerted effort to achieve it. The goal of society still needs to be agreed upon by consensus, and at present, I see no consensus, not even on fundamental questions. The chaotic result seems to be persuading populations that a more authoritarian approach could be needed, which shows that postmodernism is self-defeating, and produces the result it least wants.