Galston, W. A. and Kamarck, E. (2022) ‘Is Democracy Failing and Putting Our Economic System at Risk?’ Report, The Brookings Institution, United States. Mäkinen, J. and Kasanen, E. (2016) ‘Boundaries Between Business and Politics: A Study on the Division of Moral Labor’, Journal of Business Ethics 134(1): 103–16. Scherer, A. G., Rasche, A., Palazzo, G., et al. (2016) ‘Managing for Political Corporate Social Responsibility: New Challenges and Directions for PCSR 2.0’, Journal of Management Studies 53(3): 273–98. Schneider, A. and Scherer, A. G. (2019) ‘State Governance Beyond the “Shadow of Hierarchy”: A Social Mechanisms Perspective on Governmental CSR Policies’, Organization Studies 40(8): 1147–68. Vredenburg, J., Kapitan, S., Spry, A., et al. (2020) ‘Brands Taking a Stand: Authentic Brand Activism or Woke Washing?’ Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 39(4): 444–60.

Hello, dear reader. I am not a review, just as philosopher Markus Gabriel is not a brain. I am a reader who has been inspired at least a bit by a book from an erudite and imaginative author. I cannot easily summarize Gabriel’s book I Am Not A Brain. It was not the product of a machine or an artificial intelligence. It was not the inevitable result of human evolution. It was a succession of choices by the author and reflects human inquiry, invention, and natural history. You, dear reader with interests in organization studies, whoever you are or are becoming, might find it worth reading because it illuminates organizations as products of human consciousness with the associated capacities and defects. One might wonder whether human limitations motivate any particular organizational form or whether managing requires a higher level of consciousness. In a previous era, ecclesiastical hierarchies pressed thinkers to conform to orthodox models of human nature and institutions. These days wealthy donors urge that university faculty, public school teachers, and journalists accept the hierarchies of capitalist enterprise as manifestations of the natural world. The reader will see that Gabriel’s thinking bears on these important organizational questions and that, in his view, humans retain opportunities for invention and innovation in organizational forms. I Am Not A Brain is a critique of what Gabriel calls neurocentrism, a perspective that maps thinking and the self on the brain. He is an opponent of a naturalism that minimizes agency in order to affirm an emergent natural order. Gabriel asserts that not everything which exists can be fully investigated by the natural sciences. He reminds us of the value of the liberal arts which catalog and affirm a variety of human activities (e.g., works of art, fiction, subjective self-expression of many kinds). Gabriel also identifies himself as a neo-existentialist standing with J. P. Sartre in affirming subjective engagement (and the necessary formation of self-conception) in order to interpret and act within the world. Gabriel’s narrative is a wide ranging and illuminating investigation. The past centuries have produced a variety of monistic interpretations of human existence, deterministic systems rooted in all-encompassing religion, natural law, reductionist science, or machine. Gabriel effectively counters these approaches, considers various problems of consciousness and self-consciousness, and makes a case for free will within the constraints determined by physics, biology, and history. The “principle of sufficient reason,” borrowed from Leibniz (p. 192), stipulates that for every event there are necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for the event to take place. Some of these conditions involve biological factors that enable human consciousness and action. Others are 906093OSS0010.1177/0170840620906093Organization StudiesBook Review book-review2020

It is a truism that capitalism and democracy are intertwined. Some say that democracy is the product of competitive enterprise. Others warns that big business seeks power at the expense of democracy. What roles have segments of the business community taken in the struggle between authoritarianism and democracy? Should we expect big business, business associations, and small business to take different sides? Needless to say, political systems differ and there are no monoliths at any level of the business world. However, businesses of various kinds are critical actors and segments may mobilize their constituencies openly and legitimately or covertly and corruptly to secure their ends. We have the historic examples of the Southern Bourbons in the US who maintained their power through vote suppression and Jim Crow and the big businesses in Germany who threw their support to the Nazis.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to trace the historical foundation of the efficiency wage theory and examine its conceptual framework against other wage theories, in relation to conventional practices in human resource management.Design/methodology/approachFollowing a description of various wage theories, a conceptual analysis maps the evolutionary process of efficiency wage theory.FindingsThe concept of efficiency being applied to wages appears to evolve from Smith. The difference between the classical and the institutionalists’ perspectives appears to be the meaning ascribed to efficiency. Clark seemed to be the first one to examine the relationship between labor and productivity. Webb expanded the meaning of efficiency and demonstrated the relationship with productivity. Institutional and behavioral theorists further developed and advocated for efficiency wages. A synthesis of recent empirical studies provides support for the theory, which challenges conventional human resource management wage practices.Practical implicationsThe findings solidify the usefulness of efficiency wage theory not only as a motivational management tool but also as a source for social and economic well-being.Originality/valueThe contribution of this historical account is that it synthesizes the root and development of efficiency wages theory. It also highlights the social context of the theory and provides an interface between economic and management perspectives.

This chapter introduces a typology of conceptions of integrity. It describes several ideas that contribute to the development of a pragmatist model: integrity as wholeness, virtue as memory, and the problem of power. The chapter introduces the moderate pessimism of Reinhold Niebuhr as a corrective to excessive optimism about any model of social change and turns to John Dewey for an elaboration of philosophical pragmatism. It also proposes social bargains as a form of problem solving deriving from pragmatist integrity. The chapter then explores several ideas that will ultimately align with a pragmatist perspective: wholeness, virtue as memory, and resistance to concentrated power. Several scholars have suggested that philosophical pragmatism would be an appropriate framework for business ethics. Pragmatist integrity requires an approach to the workplace that deemphasizes organizational boundaries, does not treat management or labor as factors of production or black boxes but considers a complex of workplace communities.

This chapter explores John Dewey's contribution to organizational theory through the consideration of his written works and his activism. It introduces the concept of the public', which necessarily exists in tension with formal organizations. The chapter explores the democratic core of pragmatist organizational theory as well as the emphasis on experimentation. It contrasts Deweyan pragmatism with organizational behavior contingency theories which superficially resemble pragmatism. The chapter turns to two forms of pragmatism in action: a brief history of activist groups Dewey helped form in pursuit of pragmatist social change and an analysis of the related notions of social invention and social entrepreneurship. It places Dewey in the context of important debates with such individuals as Leon Trotsky and Edward Filene, in order to illuminate pragmatism in action. The author argument here relies, in part, on my earlier thoughts published in Collective Bargaining as an Instrument of Social Change.

This essay re-examines and challenges the conventional wisdom regarding American laissez-faire capitalism, illuminates the extent of government activism and the currents of social democracy, and underscores the significance of the federal structure of the United States political system. We propose Critical Institutionalism to facilitate understanding of the complex, dynamic and contested nature of our political economy.

Edwin Locke's essay, "Business Ethics: A Way Out of the Morass" is a brief for a business ethics founded on objectivism and formulated for management education. While Locke's argument is provocative and impressive in scope. he misconceives and caricatures the arguments of leading philosophers in order to elevate the work of Ayn Rand. His approach disserves both management education and practice.

Management education in the United States tends to be structured around case analysis. "best practices," and linear summaries of relevant research. This approach should be supplemented by the use of critical biography. Biographies of thinkers and practitioners may illuminate the process of problem solving by individuals of varied values and in varied contexts.

The Internet renders efficiencies in political organization and mobilization. Already, network technologies have assisted activists in protests of corporate-led globalization, facilitated union struggles, provided alternatives to mainstream news media, and generated a new on-line model of political fundraising. However, activists and elites both have relied on the Internet, and the cumulative effects are murky. The US presidential election of 2004 provides a prism through which to assess Internet strategies as a means for non-management stakeholders to influence the course of American politics. Republican party dominance of the mainstream media and the three branches of government increase the challenges of stakeholder organizing, particularly given the evidence of a shift toward authoritarian rule. I intend to examine Internet activism with respect to such organizations as MoveOn.org and TrueMajority.org; both of which claim to represent workers, environmentalists, and allied stakeholders.