Malleable character: organizational behavior meets virtue ethics and situationism

Abstract

This paper introduces a body of research on Organizational Behavior and Industrial/Organizational Psychology (OB/IO) that expands the range of empirical evidence relevant to the ongoing charactersituation debate. This body of research, mostly neglected by moral philosophers, provides important insights to move the debate forward. First, the OB/IO scholarship provides empirical evidence to show that social environments like organizations have significant power to shape the character traits of their members. This scholarship also describes some of the mechanisms through which this process of reshaping character takes place. Second, the character-situation debate has narrowly focused on situational influences that affect behavior episodically and haphazardly. The OB/IO research, however, highlights the importance of distinguishing such situational influences from influences that, like organizational influences, shape our character traits because they are continuous and coordinated. Third, the OB/IO literature suggests that most individuals display character traits that, while local to the organization, can be consistent across situations. This puts pressure on the accounts of character proposed by traditional virtue ethics and situationism and provides empirical support to interactionist models based on cognitiveaffective processing system theories of personality (CAPS). Finally, the OB/IO literature raises important challenges to the possibility of achieving virtue, provides valuable and untapped resources to cultivate character, and suggests new avenues of normative and empirical research.

The epistemic vices of corporations

“…Most philosophers accept non-summative accounts of epistemic virtue and vice (Byerly, 2022 ). This view is supported by examples of groups exhibiting traits that their members do not display (Mejia and Skorburg, 2022 ; List and Pettit, 2011 ; Lahroodi, 2019 ). These examples often involve group policies, procedures, or organizational culture that regulate members’ behavior when acting as a group (Miller, 2010 ; Bratman, 2022 ).…”

The Manager and Love: Evoking a Loving Inquiry in a Group Setting

“…Service-dominant (S-D) logic emphasizes distributive justice in the form of active participation from customers such that the exchange process is a balanced one (Merz et al, 2009;Payne et al 2008;Vargo et al 2006). Virtue ethics underscores the role of values in shaping behavior (Mejia and Skorburg 2022;Tsoukas 2017). These frameworks advocate for treating customers, especially impoverished and vulnerable ones, fairly and without exploitation (Santos and Laczniak, 2012).…”

Harming by Deceit: Epistemic Malevolence and Organizational Wrongdoing

“…1 Jensen and Meckling warn against " thinking about organizations as if they were persons with motivations and intentions" (Jensen & Meckling, 2000, p. 311). We attribute behavior to organizations as a shorthand to characterize behaviors of organization members shaped by the cultural environment of the organization and its governance structures (Chen et al, 1997;Dempsey, 2015;Kaptein, 2011;Mejia & Skorburg, 2022). We do not imply that organizations are homogenous entities, or take a stance on how blame should be apportioned between organizations and their members.…”

“…To apply the idea of vices to organizations, we need a functional equivalent of character that grounds a disposition. An organization's culture and governance are good candidates for grounding dispositions (Aikin & Clanton, 2010;Dempsey, 2015;Fricker, 2010;Mejia & Skorburg, 2022;Trevino, 1986). Ermann and Lundman (2002) argue that the governance and culture of organizations can encourage wrongdoing in at least three ways: by limiting information and responsibility; by establishing norms, rewards, and sanctions that encourage deviance; and through organizational elites who initiate deviance and use their hierarchical positions to implement it.…”