For quite a few years the two authors have been engaging in dialogues about management issues. Using as a model Plato's dialogues between Socrates and his various students, we have tried to clarify the nature of a concept by asking questions and thinking carefully about the answers. We disagree about many things, but agree that we respect each other's opinions, and can clarify our own viewpoints by debating them respectfully with another. For this dialogue, we decided to focus on the (...) question of the scale of business operations. One of us has a particular preference for small scale enterprise, and for the localisation of the economy, because he believes that the giganticism of corporations is behind many of the problems we face today. As you will see, the other protagonist disagrees, arguing instead that other issues than scale are at the root of why some businesses do bad things. (shrink)

This article is the fourth dialogue in a series in which two characters, a pro‐business experienced manager and a critical management academic idealist, debate contemporary management. In this dialogue, the discussion concerns the curriculum of business and management courses. Though as usual there is little agreement between the two participants, the discussion clearly shows just how difficult it will be to change business education without also changing the market position of business schools. Other topics concern the sort of economic assumptions (...) embedded in much of the curriculum, and the relationship between practical skills and political descriptions of capitalism. (shrink)

This dialogue engages with the ethics of politics of capitalism, and enacts a debate between two participants who have divergent views on these matters. Beginning with a discussion concerning definitions of capitalism, it moves on to cover issues concerning our different understandings of the costs and benefits of global capitalist systems. This then leads into a debate about the nature and purposes of regulation, in terms of whether regulation is intended to make competition work better for consumers, or to prevent (...) negative outcomes for citizens. The conclusion speculates about the usefulness or otherwise of this Socratic method of dialogue. (shrink)

This article is the fourth dialogue in a series in which two characters, a pro‐business experienced manager and a critical management academic idealist, debate contemporary management. In this dialogue, the discussion concerns the curriculum of business and management courses. Though as usual there is little agreement between the two participants, the discussion clearly shows just how difficult it will be to change business education without also changing the market position of business schools. Other topics concern the sort of economic assumptions (...) embedded in much of the curriculum, and the relationship between practical skills and political descriptions of capitalism. (shrink)

What sort of connection is there between business ethics and philosophy? The answer given here: a weak one, but it may be getting stronger. Comparatively few business ethics articles are structurally dependent on mainstream academic philosophy or on such sub-specialities thereof as normative ethics, moral theory, and social and political philosophy. Examining articles recently published in the Journal of Business Ethics that declare some dependence, the author finds that such declarations often constitute only a pro forma gesture which could be (...) omitted without detriment to the paper's content and conclusions. He also finds, however, that some authors do draw on solid philosophical work in ways that are establishing ever more meaningful interconnections between business ethics and academic philosophy. These cross-disciplinary studies, he concludes, are ground-breaking and invite creative imitation. (shrink)