IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v137y2016i1d10.1007_s10551-015-2540-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wisdom and the Tragic Question: Moral Learning and Emotional Perception in Leadership and Organisations

Author

Listed:
  • Ajit Nayak

    (University of Exeter Business School)

Abstract

Wisdom is almost always associated with doing the right thing in the right way under right circumstances in order to achieve the common good. In this paper, however, we propose that wisdom is more associated with deciding between better and worse wrongs; a winless situation we define as tragic. We suggest that addressing the tragic question is something that leaders and managers generally avoid when focusing on business decisions and choices. Yet, raising and confronting the tragic question is important for three main reasons. Firstly, it emphasises that wisdom is about recognising that doing the ethically responsible thing can sometimes lead to acting in ways that violate different ethical norms and values. Secondly, it foregrounds the issue of emotional perception in ethical decision-making. We argue that emotions are salient in directing attention to the tragic question and recognising morally ambiguous situations. Thirdly, the tragic question has important consequences for moral learning, accepting moral culpability for wrongdoing and organisational commitment to righting the wrong. We illustrate our arguments by drawing on three mini-cases: Arjuna’s dilemma in the Mahabharata, Gioia’s deliberations about his role in the Ford Pinto fires and the production of the abortion pill by French company Roussel-Uclaf.

Suggested Citation

  • Ajit Nayak, 2016. "Wisdom and the Tragic Question: Moral Learning and Emotional Perception in Leadership and Organisations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 1-13, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:137:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2540-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2540-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-015-2540-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-015-2540-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hannes Zacher & Liane Pearce & David Rooney & Bernard McKenna, 2014. "Leaders’ Personal Wisdom and Leader–Member Exchange Quality: The Role of Individualized Consideration," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 171-187, May.
    2. Peter Verhezen, 2010. "Giving Voice in a Culture of Silence. From a Culture of Compliance to a Culture of Integrity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(2), pages 187-206, October.
    3. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Post-Print hal-00814565, HAL.
    4. Nussbaum, Martha C, 2000. "The Costs of Tragedy: Some Moral Limits of Cost-Benefit Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 1005-1036, June.
    5. McCabe, Donald L. & Trevino, Linda Klebe & Butterfield, Kenneth D., 1996. "The Influence of Collegiate and Corporate Codes of Conduct on Ethics-Related Behavior in the Workplace," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 461-476, October.
    6. Elizabeth E. Umphress & John B. Bingham, 2011. "When Employees Do Bad Things for Good Reasons: Examining Unethical Pro-Organizational Behaviors," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 621-640, June.
    7. Judith Glück & Susan Bluck, 2011. "Laypeople's Conceptions of Wisdom and Its Development: Cognitive and Integrative Views," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 66(3), pages 321-324.
    8. Mark S. Schwartz, 2002. "A Code of Ethics for Corporate Code of Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 27-43, November.
    9. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00814565, HAL.
    10. Guido Palazzo & Franciska Krings & Ulrich Hoffrage, 2012. "Ethical Blindness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 323-338, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    2. Welton Chang & Pavel Atanasov & Shefali Patil & Barbara A. Mellers & Philip E. Tetlock, 2017. "Accountability and adaptive performance under uncertainty: A long-term view," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(6), pages 610-626, November.
    3. Melanie de Waal & Floor Rink & Janka Stoker, 2015. "How internal and external supervisors influence employees' self-serving decisions," DNB Working Papers 464, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    4. Jang Singh, 2011. "Determinants of the Effectiveness of Corporate Codes of Ethics: An Empirical Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(3), pages 385-395, July.
    5. Peecher, Mark E. & Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2013. "An accountability framework for financial statement auditors and related research questions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 596-620.
    6. Hershcovis, M. Sandy & Neville, Lukas & Reich, Tara C. & Christie, Amy M. & Cortina, Lilia M. & Shan, J. Valerie, 2017. "Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 45-57.
    7. Kaptein, S.P. & Schwartz, M.S., 2007. "The Effectiveness of Business Codes: A Critical Examination of Existing Studies and the Development of an Integrated Research Model," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-030-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    8. Lauren Kleynjans & Marek Hudon, 2016. "A Study of Codes of Ethics for Mexican Microfinance Institutions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 397-412, March.
    9. William T Self & Gregory Mitchell & Barbara A Mellers & Philip E Tetlock & J Angus D Hildreth, 2015. "Balancing Fairness and Efficiency: The Impact of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Accountability on Applicant Screening," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Greg Fisher & Emily Neubert, 2023. "Evaluating Ventures Fast and Slow: Sensemaking, Intuition, and Deliberation in Entrepreneurial Resource Provision Decisions," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(4), pages 1298-1326, July.
    11. Bixter, Michael T. & Luhmann, Christian C., 2014. "Shared losses reduce sensitivity to risk: A laboratory study of moral hazard," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 63-73.
    12. Muel Kaptein, 2017. "The Battle for Business Ethics: A Struggle Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 343-361, August.
    13. Matthew J. Quade & Rebecca L. Greenbaum & Mary B. Mawritz, 2019. "“If Only My Coworker Was More Ethical”: When Ethical and Performance Comparisons Lead to Negative Emotions, Social Undermining, and Ostracism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(2), pages 567-586, October.
    14. Schaerer, Michael & Kern, Mary & Berger, Gail & Medvec, Victoria & Swaab, Roderick I., 2018. "The illusion of transparency in performance appraisals: When and why accuracy motivation explains unintentional feedback inflation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-186.
    15. Katrina Graham & Jonathan Ziegert & Johnna Capitano, 2015. "The Effect of Leadership Style, Framing, and Promotion Regulatory Focus on Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 423-436, February.
    16. Yu Zhou & Hongzhang Zhu & Jun Yang & Yunqing Zou, 2021. "Does CEO Power Backfire? The Impact of CEO Power on Corporate Strategic Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    17. Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Yap, Andy J. & Thau, Stefan, 2018. "Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and empirical test," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 73-96.
    18. Desai, Sreedhari D. & Kouchaki, Maryam, 2015. "Work-report formats and overbilling: How unit-reporting vs. cost-reporting increases accountability and decreases overbilling," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 79-88.
    19. Williams, Melissa J. & Lopiano, Gabrielle & Heller, Daniel, 2022. "When the boss steps up: Workplace power, task responsibility, and engagement with unpleasant tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    20. Virginia R. Stewart & Deirdre G. Snyder & Chia-Yu Kou, 2023. "We Hold Ourselves Accountable: A Relational View of Team Accountability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 691-712, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:137:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2540-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.