GBA 2013: Social and Ethical Issues in Business Interactive Lesson Number 18 of 20 Copyright c Dale Lee Clark 2013 All Rights Reserved How will YOU lead? A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfulled, they will say: we did it ourselves.-Lau Tzu A leader is one who knows the way, goes the way, and shows the way.-John C. Maxwell Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.-Dwight D. Eisenhower No man will make a great leader who wants to do it all himself or get all the credit for doing it.-Andrew Carnegie QUESTION#1: 1. Which of the above (link) leadership styles is the Kantian Leader? Provide reasons for what you believe. Why should I agree with you? ii Lecture Outline Notes Jack Stack & Kantian Leadership 1. Presumably, the value of persons is NOT purely instrumental. 2. Presumably, the value of a division of labor is promoted within businesses through the presence of various hierarchies; for example, entry level employees, management, etc. Prima facia, this is not a situation in which persons are treated as ends but as means; for example, if the particular station, role, etc., of an employee does not facilitate the goal of the top tier (CEO, shareholders, etc.) then the role (employee) of that person is eliminated. How can we reconcile the apparent conflict between 1 & 2? FIRST PASS Create a kingdom of ends. . . Hows that? P1 As autonomous and rational creatures, persons are moral agents. (premise) P2 Interactions between persons are interactions between moral agents. (p1) P3 Interactions between persons (by definition) are moral interactions. (p2) P4 Employees are persons. (premise) C1 Interactions between employees are moral interactions. (p3, p4) P5 Moral interactions are subject to moral laws. (premise) C2 Interactions between employees are subject to the moral laws. (c1, p5) Of course, according to Kant, there is only one moral law, a.k.a. The Categorical Impera- tive. . . The third formulation of Kants categorical imperative is the following: One should act as if one were a member of an ideal kingdom of ends in which one was both subject and sovereign at the same time. In such a kingdom, all persons are both subject to the same rules and the regulations, and each person is simultaneously the creator of the various principles that underwrite those rules and regulations. iii The trick to enacting this in the workplace? Turn followers into leaders. Facilitate an organization that treats its members (employees, shareholders, etc.) as if every one of them were the captain of his (or her) own ship, so to speak. After all, any law made for any person (qua person) by any person (qua person), is a law to which any and all moral agents (qua moral agents) are subject. So, only laws that any and all rational beings could and would be subject to, that is, only universal laws, can be moral laws. Coincidentally, this is the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imperative. This means that the rules or policies of a corporation must be such that any rational being would assent to them. Now at first glance (prima facia), this just looks like a democratic form of governing a busi- ness, that is, everyone has a vote, and even worse than that, everyone must agree. Good luck with that one. . . iv SECOND PASS There are three basic levels of decision making with regard to the norms of operation of a business. The Individual Decision How many motors should we order? The Normative Decision Should that decision be left to the purchasing department? The Meta-Normative Decision How should we decide how the norms in (2) should be made? Start with the Meta-Normative: How should the company decide how to decide the norms of operation? that is to say, how should one or more moral agents (persons) treat one or more moral agents (persons)? In accordance with the Categorical Imperative. In other words, facilitate a Kingdom of Ends. Consider: Who is the best person to decide how to go about building an engine? The person trained in engine building, or the person that is trained in organizational behavior? 1. Seemingly, all rational creatures (all other conditions being equal) would agree that the person that should decide how to go about building an engine is the person that is trained in engine building. SURPRISE, this is in line with the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imper- ative. Likewise, all rational creatures (all other conditions being equal) would seem to agree that the person that should decide how many engine to order is the person that is trained in Purchasing and Supply Management. SURPRISE, this is in line with the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imper- ative. v 2. This forces the followers (employees) to be the leaders of themselves, that is, all rational creatures (including themselves) agree that it is THEY that should decide how to do what THEY have been hired to do. As identified in the Jack Stack case study, this provides the employee with a strong sense of self-determination, that is underwritten by his or her membership in the busi- ness or corporation. This makes what goes on in the corporation matter to the members in a way that a paycheck never will. SURPRISE, this is in line with the second formulation of Kants Categorical Impera- tive. In so far I do not impede actions that accord with your (free) rational will, I am treating you as an ends, NOT merely a means. It is the capacity to facilitate 1 & 2 above that picks out the Kantian Leader as a facilita- tor, as her primary responsibility is to facilitate this procedure all the way, as far as it will go. SURPRISE, this just is the facilitation of a Kingdom of Ends. Start by hiring the right people. . . This is why, in the Jack Stack example, the more information (transparency) the workers had, the better the business performed (knowing truly is half of the battle, G.I. JOE!). The more a person knows, the more that person can (and must) take responsibility for the actions that they take (think, informed consent). In a very real sense, you moral responsibility AND your sense of self-determined iden- tity are the same thing. Guiding Principles Leaders must consider the interests of every stakeholder that is affected by corporate decisions. The leader must allow (as much is possible) the stakeholders to take part in the decision making process. Whenever a situation arises where it seems that the well-being of one group of stake- holders must be sacrificed for the well-being of another group, the decision cannot be made by measuring the number of stakeholders of either group but, rather, such decisions must be made in accordance with justice, that is, in accordance with the categorical imperative. vi

GBA 2013: Social and Ethical Issues in Business Interactive Lesson Number 18 of 20 Copyright c Dale Lee Clark 2013 All Rights Reserved How will YOU lead? A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfulled, they will say: we did it ourselves.-Lau Tzu A leader is one who knows the way, goes the way, and shows the way.-John C. Maxwell Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it.-Dwight D. Eisenhower No man will make a great leader who wants to do it all himself or get all the credit for doing it.-Andrew Carnegie QUESTION#1: 1. Which of the above (link) leadership styles is the Kantian Leader? Provide reasons for what you believe. Why should I agree with you? ii Lecture Outline Notes Jack Stack & Kantian Leadership 1. Presumably, the value of persons is NOT purely instrumental. 2. Presumably, the value of a division of labor is promoted within businesses through the presence of various hierarchies; for example, entry level employees, management, etc. Prima facia, this is not a situation in which persons are treated as ends but as means; for example, if the particular station, role, etc., of an employee does not facilitate the goal of the top tier (CEO, shareholders, etc.) then the role (employee) of that person is eliminated. How can we reconcile the apparent conflict between 1 & 2? FIRST PASS Create a kingdom of ends. . . Hows that? P1 As autonomous and rational creatures, persons are moral agents. (premise) P2 Interactions between persons are interactions between moral agents. (p1) P3 Interactions between persons (by definition) are moral interactions. (p2) P4 Employees are persons. (premise) C1 Interactions between employees are moral interactions. (p3, p4) P5 Moral interactions are subject to moral laws. (premise) C2 Interactions between employees are subject to the moral laws. (c1, p5) Of course, according to Kant, there is only one moral law, a.k.a. The Categorical Impera- tive. . . The third formulation of Kants categorical imperative is the following: One should act as if one were a member of an ideal kingdom of ends in which one was both subject and sovereign at the same time. In such a kingdom, all persons are both subject to the same rules and the regulations, and each person is simultaneously the creator of the various principles that underwrite those rules and regulations. iii The trick to enacting this in the workplace? Turn followers into leaders. Facilitate an organization that treats its members (employees, shareholders, etc.) as if every one of them were the captain of his (or her) own ship, so to speak. After all, any law made for any person (qua person) by any person (qua person), is a law to which any and all moral agents (qua moral agents) are subject. So, only laws that any and all rational beings could and would be subject to, that is, only universal laws, can be moral laws. Coincidentally, this is the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imperative. This means that the rules or policies of a corporation must be such that any rational being would assent to them. Now at first glance (prima facia), this just looks like a democratic form of governing a busi- ness, that is, everyone has a vote, and even worse than that, everyone must agree. Good luck with that one. . . iv SECOND PASS There are three basic levels of decision making with regard to the norms of operation of a business. The Individual Decision How many motors should we order? The Normative Decision Should that decision be left to the purchasing department? The Meta-Normative Decision How should we decide how the norms in (2) should be made? Start with the Meta-Normative: How should the company decide how to decide the norms of operation? that is to say, how should one or more moral agents (persons) treat one or more moral agents (persons)? In accordance with the Categorical Imperative. In other words, facilitate a Kingdom of Ends. Consider: Who is the best person to decide how to go about building an engine? The person trained in engine building, or the person that is trained in organizational behavior? 1. Seemingly, all rational creatures (all other conditions being equal) would agree that the person that should decide how to go about building an engine is the person that is trained in engine building. SURPRISE, this is in line with the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imper- ative. Likewise, all rational creatures (all other conditions being equal) would seem to agree that the person that should decide how many engine to order is the person that is trained in Purchasing and Supply Management. SURPRISE, this is in line with the first formulation of Kants Categorical Imper- ative. v 2. This forces the followers (employees) to be the leaders of themselves, that is, all rational creatures (including themselves) agree that it is THEY that should decide how to do what THEY have been hired to do. As identified in the Jack Stack case study, this provides the employee with a strong sense of self-determination, that is underwritten by his or her membership in the busi- ness or corporation. This makes what goes on in the corporation matter to the members in a way that a paycheck never will. SURPRISE, this is in line with the second formulation of Kants Categorical Impera- tive. In so far I do not impede actions that accord with your (free) rational will, I am treating you as an ends, NOT merely a means. It is the capacity to facilitate 1 & 2 above that picks out the Kantian Leader as a facilita- tor, as her primary responsibility is to facilitate this procedure all the way, as far as it will go. SURPRISE, this just is the facilitation of a Kingdom of Ends. Start by hiring the right people. . . This is why, in the Jack Stack example, the more information (transparency) the workers had, the better the business performed (knowing truly is half of the battle, G.I. JOE!). The more a person knows, the more that person can (and must) take responsibility for the actions that they take (think, informed consent). In a very real sense, you moral responsibility AND your sense of self-determined iden- tity are the same thing. Guiding Principles Leaders must consider the interests of every stakeholder that is affected by corporate decisions. The leader must allow (as much is possible) the stakeholders to take part in the decision making process. Whenever a situation arises where it seems that the well-being of one group of stake- holders must be sacrificed for the well-being of another group, the decision cannot be made by measuring the number of stakeholders of either group but, rather, such decisions must be made in accordance with justice, that is, in accordance with the categorical imperative. vi