“Socially Shared Inquiry”
By Herminia Corazon Alfonso
Great Books, 2001
If there is any pronounced redeeming feature to capitalism, though driven by the engine of profit, it is this: It has industry players who believe in and are committed to be “responsible corporate citizens.”
Close to two decades ago, the idea that business can be a positive social force caught up with the country’s captains of industry. So, as a decisive step, these industrialists put up the Philippine Business for Social Progress (PBSP), an expression of their common desire to “return” to the community a portion of their earnings as their contribution to social development.
Corporations, big and small, also caught the vision of being “good neighbors” to the immediate communities where they operate. They have, in fact, gone even farther. They created the “community outreach department” or its equivalent to substantiate such “good-neighbor” policy.
An important part of this department’s work is to continue feeling the pulse of its “host community” – a term that describes not only the obvious fact that the company is located in its midst. It also underscores a not-so-obvious reality that such a firm is also genuinely interested in the life, culture and “soul” of such locale.
There is a book, “Socially Shared Inquiry,” subtitled “A Self-Reflexive, Emancipatory, Communication Approach to Social Research,” which should give the CEO or the community relations official – not only a closer look at social research, but an insight into the current debate among social researchers: Should the researcher be a detached agent extracting data from a community, or should he/she be one who is involved and who participates in the community’s life as well?
This is actually no different from the debate among journalists: Should the newsman be a detached observer of society, or should he be involved as a crusading agent, take an advocacy position – and thus would truly contribute to a more honest, freer and saner society?
The foreword to the book underscores the author’s stand: “Fundamental to her (Alfonso’s) work is the recognition that social research is not only inquiring into social phenomena; it is a social phenomenon in its own right, one where researchers enter the very social fabric they intend to study and partly cause what they observe.”
This contrasts sharply with the studied detachment of researchers, described by the book as “disembodied researchers” involving everyone except the “object of research” – the communities being observed, clarifies the author.
Author Alfonso developed the book entirely on this concept: “Socially Shared Inquiry is designed to be a method of investigation enacted by the members of a community who engage themselves in the process as both doers and subjects of inquiry.” The community must be involved in the research process.
The book is a take off from the dissertation of the author, so it still uses the language of the academician.
Actually, you should look beyond the debate on whether the researcher is involved or detached. The value of the book to people disinterested in academic debates is that the book has a wealth of methodologies in getting the community to discuss their goals and to empower themselves.
If you continue on, the author pictures to you the transaction going on in towns and barrios where change is happening.
Read about the author’s interesting account of Erin Brokovich (starring Julia Roberts), an involved researcher who changed the life of an entire community.
For corporate citizens, this book will make you better know the “soul” of the communities where you operate. For this alone, it is worth steering clear of the academician’s lingo.
Sunday, November 18, 2001
Sunday, November 11, 2001
A ‘roundtable discussion’ by CEOs on business ethics
“Paragons”
By Alfred A. Yuson
FINEX, 2001
Corporate or business ethics – like ethics, in general – is a riveting subject. You confront an act, and decide whether that act is right, wrong – or indifferent. Of course, that ushers in a lively discussion on the gray areas – from white lies to situational ethics, when the end is supposed to justify the means.
For example, regarding telling a white lie, Dietrich Bonhoeffer – in a book simply titled “Ethics” -- advanced the theory that one should defer to the “higher truth.” He cited an instance when a child asks his teacher this pained question: “Teacher, is it true that my mother is a prostitute?” The teacher’s reply: “No, my child, your mother is a loving virtuous woman.” To this Bonhoeffer commented that the teacher is upholding the “higher truth” of the child’s young mind and his future.
Close to home and to something contemporary, the book, “Paragons” -- subtitled “23 CEOs on Corporate Ethics” – confronts ethics in the workplace, in CEO suites and wood-panelled boardrooms – but the issue remains as sharply elemental as “simply a matter of right or wrong,” according to Nicasio I. Alcantara, chairman of Petron Corporation, and one of the featured CEOs in the book.
Ric Pascua, president of Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, steers clear of corporate lingo (“corporatese,” as they say), and pictures to us a dilemma: “A gun is put on your head and you are asked either to pay up or they would blow you away. You have two choices: both of them morally acceptable. You can decide to be a martyr if you are called to be one, but if it’s acceptable to you to get out of the danger by paying the fee, that’s okay too.” How would Bonhoeffer resolve that?
The beauty of ethics is it truly gives the decision-maker the “free moral space,” according to the authors of “Ties That Bind” (Executive Read, January 7, 2001), who introduced the social contracts approach to business ethics. They, in fact, used the word “hypernorms”. These are fundamental principles (like truth telling, freedom, respect for human dignity) to which “corporate norms” (company codes of conduct) must be subsumed.
Speaking of “free moral space,” that is exactly what you feel when you listen to CEOs speak about their decision to place upon themselves rules of conduct. And such freedom is best appreciated in a climate of free enterprise – or capitalism’s “engine”: profit.
In the author’s introduction of the author, he triggers an engaging discussion on profit, “Obsession with profit is a self-defeating proposition.” Then, elsewhere in the book, Fr. Bienvenido F. Nebres, S.J., and president of Ateneo de Manila University, gives an enlightened view of the profit motive:
“It is important for a company to be profitable, because if you are not profitable, if you are losing, there is not much you can do. You cannot pay your employees well. You cannot do anything for your community. You cannot be a good citizen. You cannot put in anti-pollution measures. You’re going to cut corners because you are losing.”
Management guru Peter Drucker has volumes to agree with Father Nebres on the social value of profit.
But what is the ultimate good for business? These academics have a way of distilling otherwise murky ideas. Listen to Fr. Tamerlane R. Lana, O.P., president of the University of Santo Tomas: “The ultimate standard that determines whether a conduct or behaviour is appropriate or not is the good of the human being… and the ultimate goal of all corporate endeavors is the good of the human person.”
When one talks ethics, one invariably raises the issue of integrity. The word has been so overused that what we need now is go back to the root of such word. Thankfully, the President of De La Salle University, Brother Rolando Dizon, has a ready answer:
“Integrity has at its root the notion of wholeness of self.. Being whole means that, at the center of one’s being, you have this core which gives you an identity, a knowledge of who you are.”
The book also treats you, readers, with illuminating one-liners. Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala is direct to the point: “It’s one thing to espouse principles, but another thing to live up to them. That’s when integrity comes in.”
It’s a “function of complete honesty in all your dealings,” points out Crescenciano Toledo, Johnson & Johnson general manager. Joselito D. Y. Campos, United Laboratories chairman and CEO, is laconic: “You have to be consistent. Basically, you do what you say, whether it’s personal or corporate.”
Does it make good business sense to be governed by a set of corporate ethical norms? The Ayala head gives a simple answer: “Success comes by sticking to principles.”
Petron’s Nick Alcantara draws from his experience: “If you are correct in your business practices, it may be difficult at the start, but eventually you get the winning edge in the competition.”
Procter & Gamble GM, Johnip Cua, stresses the long-term impact of sticking to one’s principles: “Without ethics, there can be no sustainable success… companies that do not have the basic ingredients of honesty and integrity do not last very long.”
The book is virtually a long but engaging “roundtable discussion” among CEOs on corporate ethics. It’s enough feat to bring them together in one glossy book, and FINEX should be commended for making it available to our readers. For starters, the book gives readers a rare chance to have a window into the ethical mindsets of the country’s captains of industry.
And for this reason, the book deserves a sequel – one where the author could probably further process the valuable thoughts of these CEOs under categories or thought clusters, for example, on “integrity,” “bribery,” “integrity in information,” etc., as additional value to readers.
The publishers have thought well to call public attention to this important subject, and it would be well if the sequel of this book would also tell our readers what they think – in the mode of Randy David, in his erstwhile talk show, giving his last word about the entire discussion.
Readers would stop and listen if this happens. Meanwhile, we have a roundtable discussion with the author facilitating – and annotating -- the entire exercise.
By Alfred A. Yuson
FINEX, 2001
Corporate or business ethics – like ethics, in general – is a riveting subject. You confront an act, and decide whether that act is right, wrong – or indifferent. Of course, that ushers in a lively discussion on the gray areas – from white lies to situational ethics, when the end is supposed to justify the means.
For example, regarding telling a white lie, Dietrich Bonhoeffer – in a book simply titled “Ethics” -- advanced the theory that one should defer to the “higher truth.” He cited an instance when a child asks his teacher this pained question: “Teacher, is it true that my mother is a prostitute?” The teacher’s reply: “No, my child, your mother is a loving virtuous woman.” To this Bonhoeffer commented that the teacher is upholding the “higher truth” of the child’s young mind and his future.
Close to home and to something contemporary, the book, “Paragons” -- subtitled “23 CEOs on Corporate Ethics” – confronts ethics in the workplace, in CEO suites and wood-panelled boardrooms – but the issue remains as sharply elemental as “simply a matter of right or wrong,” according to Nicasio I. Alcantara, chairman of Petron Corporation, and one of the featured CEOs in the book.
Ric Pascua, president of Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation, steers clear of corporate lingo (“corporatese,” as they say), and pictures to us a dilemma: “A gun is put on your head and you are asked either to pay up or they would blow you away. You have two choices: both of them morally acceptable. You can decide to be a martyr if you are called to be one, but if it’s acceptable to you to get out of the danger by paying the fee, that’s okay too.” How would Bonhoeffer resolve that?
The beauty of ethics is it truly gives the decision-maker the “free moral space,” according to the authors of “Ties That Bind” (Executive Read, January 7, 2001), who introduced the social contracts approach to business ethics. They, in fact, used the word “hypernorms”. These are fundamental principles (like truth telling, freedom, respect for human dignity) to which “corporate norms” (company codes of conduct) must be subsumed.
Speaking of “free moral space,” that is exactly what you feel when you listen to CEOs speak about their decision to place upon themselves rules of conduct. And such freedom is best appreciated in a climate of free enterprise – or capitalism’s “engine”: profit.
In the author’s introduction of the author, he triggers an engaging discussion on profit, “Obsession with profit is a self-defeating proposition.” Then, elsewhere in the book, Fr. Bienvenido F. Nebres, S.J., and president of Ateneo de Manila University, gives an enlightened view of the profit motive:
“It is important for a company to be profitable, because if you are not profitable, if you are losing, there is not much you can do. You cannot pay your employees well. You cannot do anything for your community. You cannot be a good citizen. You cannot put in anti-pollution measures. You’re going to cut corners because you are losing.”
Management guru Peter Drucker has volumes to agree with Father Nebres on the social value of profit.
But what is the ultimate good for business? These academics have a way of distilling otherwise murky ideas. Listen to Fr. Tamerlane R. Lana, O.P., president of the University of Santo Tomas: “The ultimate standard that determines whether a conduct or behaviour is appropriate or not is the good of the human being… and the ultimate goal of all corporate endeavors is the good of the human person.”
When one talks ethics, one invariably raises the issue of integrity. The word has been so overused that what we need now is go back to the root of such word. Thankfully, the President of De La Salle University, Brother Rolando Dizon, has a ready answer:
“Integrity has at its root the notion of wholeness of self.. Being whole means that, at the center of one’s being, you have this core which gives you an identity, a knowledge of who you are.”
The book also treats you, readers, with illuminating one-liners. Jaime Augusto Zobel de Ayala is direct to the point: “It’s one thing to espouse principles, but another thing to live up to them. That’s when integrity comes in.”
It’s a “function of complete honesty in all your dealings,” points out Crescenciano Toledo, Johnson & Johnson general manager. Joselito D. Y. Campos, United Laboratories chairman and CEO, is laconic: “You have to be consistent. Basically, you do what you say, whether it’s personal or corporate.”
Does it make good business sense to be governed by a set of corporate ethical norms? The Ayala head gives a simple answer: “Success comes by sticking to principles.”
Petron’s Nick Alcantara draws from his experience: “If you are correct in your business practices, it may be difficult at the start, but eventually you get the winning edge in the competition.”
Procter & Gamble GM, Johnip Cua, stresses the long-term impact of sticking to one’s principles: “Without ethics, there can be no sustainable success… companies that do not have the basic ingredients of honesty and integrity do not last very long.”
The book is virtually a long but engaging “roundtable discussion” among CEOs on corporate ethics. It’s enough feat to bring them together in one glossy book, and FINEX should be commended for making it available to our readers. For starters, the book gives readers a rare chance to have a window into the ethical mindsets of the country’s captains of industry.
And for this reason, the book deserves a sequel – one where the author could probably further process the valuable thoughts of these CEOs under categories or thought clusters, for example, on “integrity,” “bribery,” “integrity in information,” etc., as additional value to readers.
The publishers have thought well to call public attention to this important subject, and it would be well if the sequel of this book would also tell our readers what they think – in the mode of Randy David, in his erstwhile talk show, giving his last word about the entire discussion.
Readers would stop and listen if this happens. Meanwhile, we have a roundtable discussion with the author facilitating – and annotating -- the entire exercise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)