Reference no: EM13812777

Summarize: Ethics in the Workplace: Joanna Ciulla

Moyers: WALL STREET EXPLODED IN THE 1980s. BUT IN THE WAKE OF THE BOOM FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS ARE BEING ASKED ABOUT THE ETHICAL PRICE OF THE BOTTOM LINE. ETHICAL QUESTIONS ARE JOANNE CIULLA'S STOCK-IN-TRADE. SHE IS SENIOR FELLOW AT ONE OF THE LEADING BUSINESS SCHOOLS: THE WHARTON SCHOOL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA. SHE BRINGS A BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY TO HER CLASSROOM WHERE BUSINESS STUDENTS STUDY ETHICS AND MANAGEMENT. DR. CIULLA IS WRITING A BOOK ABOUT THE MEANING OF WORK IN OUR CULTURE. WE TALKED IN THE LIBRARY AT THE WHARTON SCHOOL. DID YOU SEE THE MOVIE RISKY BUSINESS? YES. TOM CRUISE PLAYS A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT WHO LETS A PROSTITUTE USE HIS PARENTS' HOUSE. HE ADMIRES HER BUSINESS SKILLS, AND ABSENCE OF GUILT AND FEAR. HE LOOKS AT HER DEVOTION TO IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION AND SAYS, "WHAT A CAPITALIST!" NOW, WHO'S TEACHING STUDENTS MORE ABOUT CAPITALISM-- YOU OR TOM CRUISE? I THINK PROBABLY TOM CRUISE IS THOUGH I DON'T KNOW IF HE WOULD AGREE TO THAT. WE'VE JUST GONE THROUGH A PECULIAR PERIOD OF HISTORY. I THINK THE 1980s WILL BE REMEMBERED AS A VERY ODD TIME. EVERYTHING IN OUR CULTURE WAS GEARED UP TOWARDS THIS NEW ENTHUSIASM FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP, COMPETITIVENESS AND BUSINESS. IT WAS ALWAYS PRESENT IN AMERICAN CULTURE BUT WE'VE GONE THROUGH SOME BIG HITS; WE'VE GONE THROUGH OIL CRISISES AND RECESSIONS THAT LEFT A DEEP IMPRINT ON YOUNG PEOPLE. ONE THING I NOTICED BETWEEN 1975 AND 1985 IS AN ENORMOUS CHANGE IN THE ATTITUDES OF STUDENTS ABOUT NOT ONLY BUSINESS, BUT ABOUT THE FUTURE. I THINK ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS FACING US WHICH CAUSED SOME OF THIS ABERRANT '80s BEHAVIOR WAS COMING OUT OF A VERY DOWN ERA-- THE JAPANESE WERE BEATING US WE WERE LOSING OUR COMPETITIVE EDGE. WE HAD GOTTEN AN ENTHUSIASTIC PRESIDENT SO IT WAS A TIME WHEN GREAT THINGS WERE GOING TO HAPPEN. AS A RESULT, EVERYTHING TOOK ON THE SHORT-TERM, BOOMTOWN, GET-IT-WHILE-YOU-CAN SORT OF GOLD RUSH ATMOSPHERE. I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE IN TOM CRUISE TO SOME EXTENT. OBVIOUSLY, HE'S NOT GOING TO RUN A BORDELLO FOREVER. HE'S EXCITED ABOUT ENTREPRENEURSHIP WHICH IS THE OTHER BIG WORD WHICH IS YOU GO INTO BUSINESS AND YOU MAKE A BUNCH OF MONEY AND YOU DO IT BY TAKING RISKS, AND YOU MAKE IT FAST. THAT SEEMED TO BE THE NERVE-END OF THE '80s AND WE HAD THE LESSON STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH-- RULES ARE FOR FOOLS, GREED IS GOOD HE WHO DIES WITH THE MOST TOYS WINS. DO YOU THINK THOSE WERE EXAGGERATED OR ISN'T THERE SOMETHING NEW AND DIFFERENT AT THE HEART OF AMERICAN ENTREPRENEURIAL CAPITAL TODAY? WELL, THEY WERE EXAGGERATIONS TO SOME EXTENT. THERE WAS AN AWFUL LOT OF FUN IN THE '80s. MOST OF THE STUDENTS WE HAVE HERE WORKED ON WALL STREET CAME FROM WALL STREET INTO BUSINESS SCHOOL HAD BEEN IN THE THICK OF IT ALL DURING THIS TIME. IT WAS A LOT OF EXCITEMENT AND FUN FOR PEOPLE. IT WAS A GREAT PLACE TO BE. THEY HAD LOTS OF RESPONSIBILITY THEY WERE MAKING LOTS OF MONEY AND SO THERE IS A PLAYFULNESS TO THAT. THERE ALSO IS THIS SENSE OF THE FACT THAT WE WERE IN A PERIOD OF DEREGULATION. PART OF WHAT HAPPENED ON THE FINANCIAL MARKETS WAS A RESULT OF DEREGULATION. IT WAS AS IF THE HARNESSES HAD BEEN LET OFF THERE WAS ALL OF THIS ENTHUSIASM AND, ON WALL STREET, PEOPLE WERE PUSHING THE LIMITS. THEY WERE PUSHING THE LIMITS OF THE LAW; THEY WERE INVENTING NEW FINANCIAL TOOLS; THEY WERE SEEING HOW FAR THEY COULD GO. SOMEBODY SAID TO ME JUST THIS WEEKEND THAT THE SYMBOL FOR OUR CULTURE AND THE BUSINESS CULTURE IN PARTICULAR HAS BECOME THE DIGITAL CLOCK WHICH LOOKS AT ONLY THE PRESENT MOMENT WITH NO HINT OF YESTERDAY OR TOMORROW-- OF THE PAST OR THE FUTURE-- ONLY THE PRESENT IS WHAT COUNTS AND THAT THAT DIGITAL CLOCK IS NOW THE EMBLEM OF AMERICAN BUSINESS. DO YOU THINK THAT'S SO? I THINK AMERICAN BUSINESS IS REALIZING IT BETTER NOT BE SO AND BUSINESS SCHOOLS AND BUSINESS STRATEGISTS ARE STARTING TO GO THROUGH A BIG CHANGE. THE BIG CHANGE IS A NEW CONCEPT-- NOT VERY NEW, BUT NEW FOR US, FROM THE JAPANESE-- THAT HAS TO DO WITH SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE. WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT SUSTAINABLE ADVANTAGES OR SUSTAINABLE BUSINESSES, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT'S TRANSPIRED IN THE PAST. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME VISION OF WHAT THE FUTURE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE-- IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A BUSINESS THAT'S GOING TO LAST AND GROW AND DEVELOP. IN THE WORK FORCE OF THE FUTURE WHITE MALES MAY BE THE MINORITY GROUP. AT LEAST HALF WILL BE WOMEN; THEY'LL BE MADE UP OF MANY MINORITY GROUPS; FAMILY CONCERNS WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT. ARE THESE BUSINESS ISSUES OR ARE THESE ETHICAL ISSUES-- WHICH IS WHAT PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS ASKING ME. AND I LIKE THAT QUESTION BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT CLEAR A LINE BETWEEN THE TWO. THEY SHOULD BE INTEGRATED. WE'VE GOT TO SAY WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE WILL BE WORKING IN THE FUTURE? WHAT WILL THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS BE? WHAT WILL THE SOCIAL PROBLEMS BE? ALL OF THESE THINGS IMPACT ON BUSINESS. YOU CAN'T OPERATE A BUSINESS IN A VACUUM. SO ONCE AGAIN YOU SEE THAT THERE'S A VERY STRONG RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHICAL THINKING AND FUTURE-ORIENTED THINKING. YOU MENTIONED THE JAPANESE AND THEY'VE BEEN THROUGH A ROUND OF RUTHLESS BUSINESS SCANDALS. YOU'RE NOT HOLDING THEM UP AS AN ETHICAL IDEAL, ARE YOU? NO, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON IN JAPAN-- THERE HAVE BEEN SCANDALS ON THE HONG KONG STOCK EXCHANGE THE SWEDISH, THE FRENCH-- EVERYWHERE WE'VE SEEN ALMOST A MIRROR IMAGE OF THE THINGS GOING ON ON WALL STREET. PART OF WHAT'S HAPPENING GLOBALLY IS THAT BUSINESS PRACTICE IS CHANGING. IN A GLOBAL ECONOMY IT'S NOT "IN ROME DO AS THE ROMANS DO." BUSINESS ISN'T JUST THE LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT MAKE IT UP IT'S A SET OF UNSAID UNDERSTANDINGS. AND WHEN YOU START BUYING STOCKS ON THE HONG KONG STOCK EXCHANGE AND YOU LIVE IN NEW YORK YOU MAKE CERTAIN ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING. PEOPLE IN HONG KONG MAY BE MAKING DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING. IN SOME OF THESE STOCK EXCHANGES IT'S ALMOST MADNESS TO BUY STOCKS ON THEM BECAUSE THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF UNDERSTANDINGS OF WHAT INSIDER TRADING IS. IT IS BECOMING A MORE AMORAL INTERNATIONAL CULTURE? WELL, WHAT'S GOING TO EVENTUALLY HAPPEN I THINK, FROM DISCUSSIONS WITH PEOPLE IN OTHER PLACES IS THAT WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH INTERNATIONAL NORMS. THIS IS THE SAME PROBLEM WITH BRIBERY AND QUESTIONABLE PAYMENTS. YOU MAY ARGUE THAT IN A PARTICULAR SOCIETY BRIBES ARE COMMON, EVERYBODY USES THEM IT'S UNDERSTOOD, FINE. WHY SHOULD WE AS AMERICANS BE SO EDGY ABOUT BRIBES? WE HAVE THIS FOREIGN CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT THAT SAYS WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PAY THEM. BUT WHEN YOU START DOING BUSINESS WITH DIFFERENT PEOPLE FROM LOTS OF DIFFERENT CULTURES WHO DON'T KNOW ALL OF THESE PRACTICES AND CUSTOMS AND AREN'T SENSITIVE TO THEM-- FIRST OF ALL, IS THAT AN EFFICIENT WAY TO DO BUSINESS IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BUSINESS ON A GLOBAL SCALE? IS IT EFFICIENT THAT EVERY STOCK EXCHANGE HAS ITS OWN NORMS FOR WHAT INSIDERS ARE? EVENTUALLY THERE'S GOT TO BE A CONVERGENCE OF RULES TO DO BUSINESS WITH EACH OTHER. THAT'S PART OF THE PRACTICAL ISSUE OF ALL OF THIS. IT'S NOT THAT OUR STANDARDS ARE HIGHER OR BETTER OR, AS I LIKE TO CALL IT, THAT WE'RE ETHICAL IMPERIALISTS; BUT RATHER THAT AT SOME POINT THERE HAVE TO BE STANDARDS THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS KIND OF GLOBAL BUSINESS POSSIBLE. PETER DRUCKER SAYS THAT IT'S A MISTAKE TO TRY TO TEACH BUSINESS ETHICS. THERE REALLY IS NO SUCH THING AS BUSINESS ETHICS. ETHICS, HE SAYS, IS FOR EVERYONE. IT'S THE RULES OF INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOR WHETHER WE WORK IN A CORPORATION, A FACTORY AS A JOURNALIST OR A FLORIST. WELL, THE OTHER THING PEOPLE USUALLY SAY WHEN YOU SAY YOU TEACH BUSINESS ETHICS IS THEY SAY, "WELL, ISN'T THAT A CONTRADICTION OF TERMS?" AND, YES IT IS, AND LET ME EXPLAIN THAT WHEN WE THINK OF ETHICS YOU THINK OF SOMEONE DOING GOOD THINGS OR PERFORMING GOOD ACTIONS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO AND BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. WHEN WE THINK OF BUSINESS, WE THINK OF ACTIONS WE THINK OF STRATEGIES, WE THINK OF BEHAVIORS THAT ARE ALL GEARED TOWARDS A PARTICULAR END WHICH IS TO MAKE PROFITS. SO THERE'S A KIND OF CONTRADICTION THERE. ONE OF THE CHIEF QUESTIONS IN BUSINESS ETHICS IS: CAN A BUSINESS ACT ETHICALLY, IF THAT'S THE CRITERIA? THIS COMES FROM THE PHILOSOPHER IMMANUEL KANT WHO SAID, "THE ONLY GOOD IS A GOOD WILL." NOW, CAN BUSINESS HAVE A GOOD WILL? WHEN A COMPANY SETS UP A PROGRAM FOR SCHOOLCHILDREN IN A NEIGHBORHOOD-- SAY THEY DONATE COMPUTERS AND STAFF TO TRAIN THEM-- IS THE COMPANY DOING IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A GOOD WILL OR ARE THEY DOING IT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO HAVE GOOD P.R.? THIS IS A CRUCIAL QUESTION. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT ETHICS IN BUSINESS IS DIFFERENT THAN ETHICS IN THE REST OF LIFE. WE'RE SAYING THAT IN BUSINESS ETHICS FUNCTIONS IN A PARTICULAR CONTEXT AND THE PROBLEMS OF BUSINESS MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO APPLY THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES WE HAVE. WHAT ABOUT THE BUSINESS EXECUTIVE? I KNOW YOU, ON OTHER OCCASIONS, EXPRESSED SOME DISCOMFORT WITH THE LIKES OF T. BOONE PICKENS AND DONALD TRUMP BECAUSE THEIR WEALTH AND POWER SEEM ALIENATED FROM SOME BROADER AIM OF SOCIETY. YEAH, I MEAN, AND THE QUESTION IS-- WE HAVE THIS WHOLE WONDERFUL SYSTEM OF DEMOCRACY WE HAVE BUSINESS LAWS AND REGULATIONS AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT ALLOW BUSINESS TO OPERATE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS ANY BUSINESS PERSON HAS TO RESPECT IS THAT THEY SHOULD OPERATE IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT DESTROY THOSE THINGS WHICH MAKE THEIR BUSINESS POSSIBLE. IN BUSINESSES THEMSELVES, THOUGH IT'S NOT THESE INDIVIDUAL THINGS-- RARE DRAMATIC EVENTS-- BUT WITH ALL THESE LEVERAGED BUYOUTS AND TAKEOVERS THE CRISIS THAT'S GOING ON INSIDE OF CORPORATIONS IS A CRISIS OF TRUST. TRUST? TRUST, YES, BECAUSE... PUBLIC TRUST OF... PUBLIC TRUST, EMPLOYEE TRUST-- HOW CAN A COMPANY HAVE LOYAL EMPLOYEES WHEN THE EMPLOYEES DON'T KNOW WHETHER TOMORROW THEIR COMPANY WILL GET TAKEN OVER? COMPANIES DEMAND LOYALTY AND COMMITMENT FROM EMPLOYEES AND YET THEY'RE NOT WILLING TO GIVE THE SAME BACK TO THEM. TRUST AND LOYALTY ARE RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIPS; YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO SIDES TO THEM. YOU CAN'T EXPECT SOMEBODY TO BE TRUSTFUL OR LOYAL IF YOU AREN'T GOING TO BE. THERE'S ALSO THE QUESTION OF JUSTICE. THERE'S ENORMOUS WAGE DISPARITIES BETWEEN WHAT PEOPLE AT THE TOP OF THE COMPANY MAKE AND PEOPLE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE COMPANY MAKE. AMERICANS DO HAVE A STRONG STRAIN OF EGALITARIANISM AND WE MAY HAVE REACHED A POINT WHERE IT'S BECOME DOWNRIGHT OFFENSIVE THAT HEADS OF CORPORATIONS THAT CAN BE TAKEN OVER TOMORROW AND EVERYONE CAN BE OUT OF BUSINESS THE NEXT MOMENT ARE BEING PAID ENORMOUS SUMS OF MONEY. YOU SAY WE'RE FACING A MORAL CRISIS OF WORK AND MEANING. IN WHAT SENSE? ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I'M CONCERNED WITH IS THE DOMINANCE THAT WORK HAS COME TO PLAY IN EVERYONE'S LIFE AS THE ARENA IN WHICH THEY HAVE SOCIAL INTERACTIONS THEY BUILD THEIR FRIENDSHIPS. IT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING CARE OF THEIR FAMILY TAKING CARE OF THEIR CHILDREN. IN SOME WAYS THESE ARE VERY POSITIVE AND IMPORTANT THINGS BECAUSE IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO WORK. ON THE OTHER HAND, WE'VE LOOKED AT THE DEMISE OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS IN OUR SOCIETY, LIKE COMMUNITY. WE'VE SEEN FAMILIES-- HIGH DIVORCE RATE, PROBLEMS IN FAMILIES. THE QUESTION IS: DO YOU WANT MOST OF THE THINGS THAT PROVIDE MEANING IN YOUR LIFE, SOCIAL INTERACTION DO YOU WANT TO HAVE TO DEPEND ON YOUR BUSINESS OR YOUR WORK TO PROVIDE THOSE THINGS? AND IN THE PRECARIOUS ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE LIVE IS THAT REALLY SMART, TO PUT YOUR HANDS, YOUR HAPPINESS AND YOUR NOTION OF MEANING IN THE HANDS OF THE ECONOMY? IT'S CERTAINLY REALISTIC BECAUSE MOST OF US SPEND MORE TIME AT WORK THAN WE DO SLEEPING OR WITH OUR FAMILIES. SO IF WE DON'T FIND SOME CONTRIBUTION OF WORK TO THE MEANING AND EXPERIENCE OF LIFE THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE VACANT TO A LARGE EXTENT. THE QUESTION IS: PEOPLE DO PUT MEANING INTO THE CONTEXT OF HOW THEY THINK ABOUT THEIR LIVES BUT THEY SUPPLY THE MEANING. THEY DECIDE WHAT THAT MEANING IS GOING TO BE. MY CONCERN IS: SHOULD THE WORK PLACE BE CONSTRUCTING MEANINGS FOR PEOPLE? DO YOU THINK THAT'S HAPPENING? A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO IT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE MOTIVATING TOOL. THE JAPANESE HAVE DONE WELL AT IT. THEIR MANAGERS HAVE BECOME ALMOST HOLY MEN. YEAH, BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT A BROADER CONTEXT, THERE OF JAPANESE SOCIETY. THE BACKDROP IN WHICH THIS ALL OCCURS IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE BACKDROP OF AMERICAN LIFE. THEIR NOTION OF COMMUNITY IS VERY DIFFERENT. THEIR NOTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE GROUP IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN OURS. SO I THINK THAT THE JAPANESE-- THEY'RE PROBABLY GOING TO BECOME MORE LIKE US THAT'S WHAT I REALLY THINK'S GOING TO HAPPEN. BUT RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE INSTITUTIONS IN AMERICAN LIFE. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ONES THAT ARE DECLINING AND THE ONES THAT SEEM TO BE TAKING DOMINANCE RIGHT NOW. AND THE ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS ARE BECOMING DOMINANT BECAUSE OF THE COLLAPSE OF NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITIES, TOWNS. IF YOU COMMUTE TO WORK TWO HOURS, YOU HAVE NO TIME TO BE A VOLUNTEER FIREMAN OR GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD MEETING OR ATTEND THE FUNCTIONS WE USED TO WHEN WE LIVED IN SMALLER TOWNS. SO THE WORK PLACE DOES BECOME ALMOST THE NEW HOME. BUT IT'S A PRECARIOUS HOME BECAUSE IT DOESN'T OFFER WHAT THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS OFFER. IT'S INSTABLE; YOU COULD LOSE YOUR JOB... THE ECONOMICS, THE CORPORATION, THE COMPANY? YES, IT'S UNSTABLE, YOU COULD BE FIRED TOMORROW WE HAVE A DOCTRINE CALLED EMPLOYMENT AT WILL. PEOPLE CAN LOSE THEIR JOBS TOMORROW. THEY CAN LOSE FRIENDS ON THE JOB WHO HAVE TO LEAVE, GET TRANSFERRED. SO I'M RAISING THE QUESTION IS THIS THE KIND OF INSTITUTION THAT WE WANT TO LOOK FOR THOSE KINDS OF MEANINGS IN? I'M WORRIED PEOPLE COME TO EXPECT MORE AND MORE FROM THEIR WORK PLACE. WHAT DO THEY EXPECT? WELL, THEY EXPECT INTERESTING WORK. WE'VE GOT A FAIRLY EDUCATED WORK FORCE; WE'RE EXPECTING CHALLENGING JOBS, INTERESTING JOBS THAT MAKE US FEEL GREAT ABOUT OURSELVES. IN OUR SOCIETY, PEOPLE ARE DEFINED BY THEIR JOBS. BUT IS THERE ANYTHING TOO WRONG ABOUT FINDING A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF YOUR IDENTITY IN YOUR WORK? THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH YOU FINDING IT; WHAT'S WRONG IS SOMEONE TRYING TO TELL YOU WHAT IT IS. AND I THINK THAT'S THE BIG DIFFERENCE. YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT WORK IS PROMISING MORE THAN IT CAN DELIVER? YES-- IF ANYONE KNEW HOW TO CREATE MEANINGFUL WORK IT WOULD BE GREAT, WONDERFUL. IF ANYONE KNEW HOW TO DEFINE IT SO THAT WE COULD ALL GO AFTER IT THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. I'M NOT EVEN SURE EVERYONE WANTS MEANINGFUL WORK. IF I WENT UP TO EVERY PERSON ON THE STREET AND SAID "DO YOU WANT MEANINGFUL WORK?" IN OUR CULTURE, IT SEEMS IRRATIONAL TO SAY NO. IN OTHER CULTURES THEY MIGHT SAY "NO, I'D LIKE TO NOT HAVE TO WORK AT ALL." WELL, YOU HAVE TO SPEND TIME OUT THERE. WHEN YOU DO, DON'T YOU WANT THAT WORK PLACE TO BE AS "MEANINGFUL" AS POSSIBLE? DO YOU WANT IT TO BE AS MEANINGFUL OR DO YOU WANT IT TO BE AS COMFORTABLE ACCOMMODATING TO YOUR LIFESTYLE? STUDS TERKEL, IN HIS BOOK WORKING STARTED OUT BY SAYING "FOR SOME PEOPLE, WORK IS A DAILY HUMILIATION." WELL, YOU DON'T WANT WORK TO BE A DAILY HUMILIATION, OBVIOUSLY. YOU GET SOME SELF-ESTEEM FROM WORK, THAT YOU HAVE A ROLE. BUT WE'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT WHAT KINDS OF WORK IS AVAILABLE IN THE WORLD. AND MAYBE WHAT'S NEEDED-- IT'S INTERESTING TO LOOK AT GOVERNMENT WORK. FOR MOST PEOPLE THESE DAYS IT'S NOT CHIC TO TALK ABOUT GOVERNMENT WORK AS BEING GREAT. SOME OF THE BEST INNOVATIONS IN MAKING WORK ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE'S LIVES IS FOUND IN THE GOVERNMENT. THEY WERE THE FIRST TO USE FLEX TIME. FLEX TIME IS A VERY RADICAL INNOVATION. IT HAS AN ENORMOUS HUMANIZING EFFECT. IT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO FIT THEIR LIFE SCHEDULES INSTEAD OF HAVING THEIR LIFE CONFORM TO WORK. IT MAKES SOME ALLOWANCE FOR MAKING WORK CONFORM TO THEIR LIFE STYLES. A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS WILL BE ON THE TABLE IN THE FUTURE. THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES ABOUT TAKING WORK HOME COMPUTERIZATION OF WORK, AND THERE'S THE DARK SIDE OF THAT WHICH IS THE PERSON WITH THE FAX MACHINE IN THE CAR AND THE TELEPHONE, SO THAT THEY CAN NEVER GET AWAY FROM WORK. WHAT PRECISELY CONCERNS YOU ABOUT WORK? YOU TALK ABOUT THIS MORAL CRISIS OF WORK AND MEANING. WHAT IS THE MORAL CRISIS? THE MORAL CRISIS IS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO STRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN WORK AND THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. AND I THINK THAT IT'S A PRESSING CRISIS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF THE IMPORTANCE AND THE DOMINANCE OF THE ECONOMIC INSTITUTIONS IN OUR CULTURE AND THAT EACH PERSON, I THINK, IS STRUGGLING IN TERMS OF DUAL CAREER, FAMILIES, RAISING CHILDREN TO TRY TO FIND SOME BALANCE THERE. AND SO I'M SAYING, BE CAREFUL. WE WANT THE WORK PLACE TO BE BETTER WE WANT WORK TO BE HUMANE, INTERESTING, ETC. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE SOMETHING THAT TAKES OVER THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF PEOPLE'S LIVES. ONE OF THE BEST-SELLING BOOKS OF 1980 WAS IN SEARCH OF EXCELLENCE, AND THE FELLOWS WHO WROTE THAT ARGUED THAT PEOPLE SO DESPERATELY NEED MEANING IN THEIR LIVES, THAT THEY WILL SACRIFICE A GREAT DEAL TO THE INSTITUTION THAT GIVES IT TO THEM. DO YOU FIND THAT SO? PEOPLE DO SACRIFICE EVERYTHING FOR THEIR WORK. AND WHAT DO THEY SACRIFICE? THEY SACRIFICE THEIR FAMILIES, THEY SACRIFICE THEIR CHILDREN. IS THAT THE KIND OF SACRIFICE YOU WANT PEOPLE TO MAKE? YOU WANT PEOPLE TO WORK HARD, BE ENTHUSIASTIC BUT PART OF THAT HAS TO DO WITH THINGS ABOUT THE WORK PLACE ITSELF. LOOK AT WHAT MAKES WORK FRUSTRATING. ONE OF THE KEY CAUSES OF STRESS ON THE JOB IF YOU LISTEN TO THE STORIES AND HEAR WHAT MAKES PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY'RE UNDER STRESS PARTLY, IT'S ETHICAL ISSUES. THERE'S AN ETHICAL DISTANCE GOING ON. THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY BUSINESS ETHICS IS INSEPARABLE FROM TALKING ABOUT MANAGERIAL PROBLEMS. YOU HAVE ONE SET OF VALUES AND BELIEFS AND YET, WHEN YOU GO TO WORK, THOSE ARE VIOLATED. SECOND THING, THE QUESTION OF JUSTICE OR FAIRNESS. NOTHING MAKES PEOPLE MORE UNHAPPY AT WORK THAN FEELING LIKE THEY'RE BEING TREATED UNFAIRLY. SO THE KEY OF MANAGEMENT IS THE SENSE OF FAIRNESS IN THE WORK PLACE. SO YOU CAN START GOING DOWN A CHECKLIST SAYING WHAT THINGS CAN A CORPORATION PROVIDE THAT MAKE WORK SATISFYING. IT CAN PROVIDE VERY PRACTICAL THINGS THAT GET DOWN TO GOOD MANAGEMENT GOOD BUSINESS, FAIRNESS. BUT MEANING? DO YOU WANT RELIGIOUS FERVOR FROM YOUR EMPLOYEES? IN SOME OF THIS LITERATURE AFTER IN SEARCH OF EXCELLENCE THEY WANT A KIND OF RELIGIOUS ZEAL AND EXCITEMENT. SOME OF THE LANGUAGE WAS ALMOST LIKE A RELIGIOUS REVIVAL. YOU HAD TO FIND PEOPLE'S "HOT BUTTONS." I THOUGHT THAT WAS RATHER OFFENSIVE THAT YOU HAD TO FIND THEIR HOT BUTTONS TO GET THEM EXCITED AND SOUPED-UP. IT'S NOT A VERY SUSTAINABLE KIND OF MANAGEMENT STRATEGY. YOU CAN'T HAVE PEOPLE SOUPED-UP ALL THE TIME. SOME PEOPLE HAVE FOUND IT OFFENSIVE. THERE'S EVEN BEEN SCANDALS WHERE COMPANIES HAVE TRIED TO GET THEIR EMPLOYEES SOUPED-UP AND THEY'VE PROTESTED, CALLING IT MANIPULATION. WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME IT'LL BE DIFFICULT FOR CORPORATIONS TO ENGINEER MEANING FOR PEOPLE BECAUSE THE WORK PLACE IN A CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT IS ALWAYS ONE OF UNEQUAL POWER. THERE'S ALWAYS COMPETITION AND CONFLICT. THERE'S ALWAYS A ROUGH FORM OF INJUSTICE TO IT AND THAT NO MATTER WHAT MANAGERS-- THE MANAGERS YOU TEACH-- TRY TO DO, THEY CAN NEVER ULTIMATELY MAKE THE WORK PLACE A RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE. AND THERE'S ANOTHER FACET. WE ALSO LIVE IN A CONSUMER SOCIETY. WE JUGGLE THE IDEA OF SOMETHING LIKE MEANINGFUL WORK OR THE ROLE THAT OUR WORK PLAYS WE JUGGLE HOW MUCH STUFF DO WE WANT HOW MANY CARS DO WE WANT, DO WE WANT A VACATION HOME DO WE WANT TO BUY A HOUSE, WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT. SO THERE'S THE ROLE OF WORK, THE ROLE OF CONSUMERS AND THE ROLE OF LEISURE. AND, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE ALL OF THEM TO HAVE A GREAT JOB, BE RICH AND HAVE PLENTY OF TIME OFF SO THAT WE COULD DO FUN THINGS. OR MAYBE, IF YOU HAVE A REALLY MEANINGFUL JOB YOU DON'T CARE THAT MUCH ABOUT TIME OFF BECAUSE YOU GET SO MUCH OUT OF YOUR WORK. IT'S INTERESTING THAT LEISURE PURSUITS HAVE SO MUCH TURNED INTO WORK. EVEN PLAY ISN'T PLAY. WE WORK AT OUR TENNIS GAME, WORK OUT, LISTEN TO MUSIC TO RELAX. WE DON'T DO THINGS JUST TO DO THEM. WE'VE MADE ENORMOUS PROGRESS BUT BE CAREFUL ABOUT THE ARGUMENT THAT HAVING MADE PROGRESS MEANS WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING ELSE. I THINK THAT CREATIVE BUSINESS PEOPLE AND PEOPLE IN ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS AND PEOPLE WHO ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF THE SOCIAL CRITIC CONSTANTLY HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION HOW DO WE MAKE THINGS BETTER? WE TALK ABOUT TECHNOLOGY BEING ALL THIS PROGRESS; HOW DO WE MAKE WORK BETTER FOR PEOPLE? THIS HAS BEEN A CONSTANT STRUGGLE. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH SLAVERY WE'VE GONE THROUGH HIDEOUS INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH PERIODS WHERE PEOPLE BECAME "MEN IN THE GRAY FLANNEL SUIT." IN THE '50s, THERE WAS ALL THIS LITERATURE. AND THE '50s LITERATURE, BY THE WAY, IS FASCINATING. THEY RAISE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I'M RAISING NOW OF WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR US TO SUBSUME OURSELVES UNDER THESE HUGE ORGANIZATIONS AND BECOME PART OF THEM AND FIT INTO THAT ENVIRONMENT. BUT WE HAVE TO THINK OF HOW TO MAKE THINGS BETTER. IT SEEMS TO ME, THE NOTION OF PROGRESS IS BETTER AND PART OF BETTER ISN'T JUST MORE MONEY OR BETTER TECHNOLOGY OR MORE EFFICIENCY-- AND OF COURSE, EFFICIENCY'S AN IMPORTANT VALUE A DOMINATING VALUE IN OUR SOCIETY TODAY-- BUT TO MAKE IT BETTER ETHICALLY. HOW DO YOU MAKE PEOPLE WORK? HOW DO YOU MAKE PEOPLE WORK IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T EXPLOIT THEM? HOW DO YOU GIVE PEOPLE WORK THAT-- HOW ARE YOU FAIR? CAN WE MAKE PROGRESS IN FAIRNESS IN THE WORK PLACE? CAN WE MAKE PROGRESS IN JUSTICE IN THE WORK PLACE? OLD QUESTIONS. OH, VERY OLD. WHAT GIVES MEANING TO YOUR LIFE? MY WORK.

Moyers: FROM THE WHARTON SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA THIS HAS BEEN A CONVERSATION WITH JOANNE CIULLA. I'M BILL MOYERS.