Domènec Melé

Viktor E. Frankl’s logotherapy is grounded in experience and in an explicit philosophical anthropology influenced by existentialist thinkers such as Søren Kierkegaard and Gabriel Marcel, by Martin Buber’s philosophy of dialogue, Max Scheler’s phenomenology, and Aristotelian-Thomistic ontology. Frankl’s conception of the person recognises the human being as an indivisible unity, irreducible to larger wholes, unique in existence, endowed with a spiritual dimension, oriented toward meaning, and essentially relational—entailing existence-with-others. The person is also endowed with freedom and the corresponding responsibility, characterised by a transcendent orientation (not closed in on self), and possesses inherent dignity rather than mere utility value. Although Frankl is often described as an existentialist psychiatrist, this article argues that he is more accurately situated within the tradition of personalism. His conception of the human being can contribute to enriching the philosophical foundations of the contemporary Humanistic Management movement by providing new horizons for a humanistic-personalist approach that places the person and his or her existential characteristics at the centre of management.

A variety of theories of management and organizational studies have failed to consider the human being in his or her integrity and, thus, fall short of being humanistic. This article seeks to contribute to the recovery of a more complete view of the human being in management, learning from classical humanism developed throughout Western Civilization, from the Greek and Roman Philosophers and the Judeo-Christian legacy to the Renaissance. More specifically, it discusses several relevant aspects of this Classical humanism, which can aid in re-thinking management. These include a realistic epistemology and metaphysics, and the human being as a whole. Classical humanism also entails the consideration of the human action as a unity with both internal and external dimensions, ethics understood as a guide for good life, society viewed as a community of people, and being open to beauty and transcendence.

This editorial explores how ethical decision-making can be reimagined in response to the turbulence and complexity of today’s global environment. Drawing on the concept of a VUCA world-marked by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity-it argues that traditional models of rationality are no longer sufficient to guide responsible action. Instead, the authors propose an integrated framework grounded in virtue ethics, practical wisdom, and moral formation across three interrelated levels: individual character, organizational culture, and educational formation. The editorial calls for a reorientation of leadership, management, and education toward the cultivation of ethical agency capable of responding to moral ambiguity and systemic uncertainty. It concludes by situating the contributions to the Special Issue within this broader humanistic approach to decision-making.

This paper reports on a study of the largest Spanish corporations concerning the status of corporate ethics policies. The research project, the first of its kind in Spain, has two parts. First, the types of formal documents the companies use are analysed, including those dealing with ethical values or norms. Three groups of companies are distinguished: the first group has no formal documents dealing with ethical values, and the reasons given for not having any ethical statement are discussed. A second group has one document mentioning ethical values (generally the vision and/or mission statement), and a third group has in place two or more documents (one generic and the other more detailed, such as a code of conduct). The findings show that the latter group is more proactive than the former in implementing measures for promoting business ethics throughout the organisation. In the second part of the research, the study analyses the differences between companies whose headquarters are in Spain, Europe and USA regarding the arguments, the focus and the practices used to formalise business ethics.

Las propuestas de fundamentación de la ética empresarial son abundantes y su discernimiento es a menudo complejo. Aquí se revisan las más relevantes contrastándolas con la idea de ética presentada por Polo, quien la entiende in statu nascente, al tiempo que la considera guía para la libertad conducente al desarrollo de la esencia humana. Esto le lleva a una unidad sistémica de la ética en la que concurren tras aspectos o dimensiones interrelacionados: bienes, normas y virtudes. Tras discutir la situación actual, se concluye abogando por una renovación de la fundamentación de la ética empresarial, considerando la ética, en su integridad de bienes, normas y virtudes, como una guía para la excelencia humana en la empresa, y no simplemente para dar una base normativa al mercado y la empresa.

This paper is the introduction to the Special Issue with a selection of papers presented at the 21st IESE International Symposium on Ethics, Business and Society, held in Barcelona, Spain, in July 2021. The Symposium focused on the future of work and how to promote dignity and human flourishing. This editorial introduction emphasizes how work has been studied over the centuries and how new directions have been considered in recent times. We suggest that dignity and human flourishing are particularly relevant in the current context and for the future of work. Finally, the papers that make up this special issue are introduced and summarized.

In light of the recent crisis and its aftershocks, it becomes crucial to reflect on the relationship between finance and accounting and on how to integrate ethics and efficiency, as well as on how to motivate and empower practitioners in the world of finance to commit to justice, fairness and enhanced understanding, and to improving their personal integrity. This article, written as an editorial introduction to a special issue includes works related to control measurement and ethical behavior, misbehaviors in finances and accounting, professionalism in accounting, ethical investing and corporate reporting. We conclude by suggesting further research for a better integration of technical aspects of accounting and finances into business activity—human activity actually—and an for understanding of ethics not limited to rules, but as a mutual and interdependent system of values, virtues and principles.

Christian ethics applied to economics and business has a long tradition. This dates back at least to the thirteenth century, with noteworthy developments in the four following centuries and again in the last century. Christian faith and reason intertwine to bring about principles, criteria, and guidelines for action and a set of virtues with relevance for economic activity. Christian spirituality, with 2000 years of history, has been embedded in Christianity from its beginning, but the application to modern business activity is relatively recent. This article introduces a special issue which, we hope, will make its own small contribution to the developments of both Christian ethics and spirituality in the leading business organizations. After a short historical overview and a consideration of the current situation of Christian ethics and spirituality in business, we introduce the papers selected for this issue.

Given the objections and controversies surrounding the “diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging” (DEIB) criteria for organizations and institutions, it seems important to disentangle the ambiguity of this concept. This chapter analyzes it through the lens of Personalist Philosophy. This philosophy turns around the notion of “person,” which denotes dignity and entails human-wholeness, substantial unity of body and mind, the uniqueness of each person, and the relevance of personal growth. Under this perspective, four categories of diversity are identified. One is based on ontological considerations (a sexed being), which embraces the whole person, body, and mind. A second is derived from individual relatively stable internal features. A third refers to diversities based on personal ties and communitarian belonging, such as family, religious, ethnic, sociocultural, socioeconomic, and geopolitical diversities. The fourth category refers to diverse personal developments, including personal endowments acquired over time, which bring about differences in education, character development, hobbies, professional expertise, and organizational situations. The recognition of this diversity involves, first, the recognition of the universal human dignity and innate rights inherent to each person, and the moral imperative treating of every person with good will and benevolence. Second, recognizing diversity by showing respect and awareness of minorities and vulnerable groups and giving help to specific groups in accordance with their respective identity. Third, leading organizations and institutions with practical wisdom and a sense of community, building up such a community framed by the common good, solidarity, and subsidiarity, and promoting personal growth and sense of belonging through appropriate participation and support.

Humanism, in a broad sense, means “human-centeredness” and involves interest in human beings, their worth, capacities, needs, welfare, and development. This means giving people a primordial role in economic activity, but without neglecting economic outcomes. Humanism stands in contrast to economism, which focuses exclusively or primarily on economic results and values everything solely in economic terms.The need to humanize economic activity rests on the need to seek out a sound form of humanism. Here we propose a humanism initially developed in Western civilization when early Christian writers met Socratic philosophy and – to a lesser extent – certain Stoic philosophers, along with some Roman jurists. In this approach, Christian faith and reason are harmoniously intertwined without reducing either one to the other. Because of its rational content, this humanism can be appreciated by not only Christian believers but also some non-believers, who value its wisdom and internal logic.Augustine of Hippo (fifth century) brought about significant insights and with Thomas Aquinas (thirteenth century) attained great splendor. Aquinas worked in the context of the nascent university, drawing from Aristotle, Augustine, and other sources, using the intellectually rigorous Scholastic method. Later Scholasticism, from the fourteenth to the early seventeenth century in Italy, Spain, and Portugal continued along the same lines of thought, addressing political, social, and economic problems in the context of the Commercial Revolution and the New World. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, secular humanism emerged, followed, in the next century, by influential anti-humanist streams of thought, while classical humanism stagnated. However, since the late nineteenth century, a neo-classical humanism emerged with a new vitality, incorporating elements not considered in medieval and Renaissance thought and emphasizing the human person as the subject, center, and purpose of social life and economic activity. Christian thinkers and Catholic social teaching had a significant role in this revival of humanism, emphasizing the transcendent dimension.Finally, the chapter presents a set of key elements for a renewed and sound person-centered humanism assumed in this work, which includes genuine aspects of classical humanism as well as significant contributions of modernity, through Personalist Philosophy, and some specific Catholic teachings. This renewed humanism seems promising to contribute to re-think business through a person-centric approach in order to overcome some convectional fragmented or incomplete visions of the human being in business.

The past century has brought about a gradual reevaluation of the human element of business from a production factor to a human resource. Today, “putting people first” is often recommended, with a view to enhanced results: indeed, the person is deemed “the company’s greatest asset” or seen as a kind of “human capital” worth investing in, often with improved performance. Some highlight good relationship as “social capital.” In addition, there is no lack of companies that seek to foster employee initiative, creativity, and participation. People “matter”: but are they valued for themselves – simply for being persons – or merely as resources? Are the human rights inherent in every human being respected? In many countries they are (at least as a matter of law); in others, much less so. Some countries report abuse and exploitation.Treating persons as they deserve requires a correct understanding of what a human being is. This is a difficult subject which has given rise to intense debate throughout history. Nevertheless, the question is inescapable for the proficient manager. In reality, the manager always does harbor some idea of the “human individual,” even if it is only an uncritically assumed belief. And this has consequences for good management. It is not the same thing to treat a person as a mere resource that can be manipulated and to treat him or her as a conscious, free being, endowed with dignity, in a state of continual development.Taking what we deem to be the best contributions of ancient and modern philosophy, particularly Personalist Philosophy, as our point of departure, in this chapter we will seek to deepen our idea of the human being in all his or her integrity, considering human capacities, as well as the process of human development. We defend the notion of human person, as a comprehensive of entailing human wholeness, and the idea that each person is unique and unrepeatable, endowed with great dignity and in a continual process of personal growth as a human being. The chapter concludes with a short note on human work, so relevant in business companies.

Two crucial questions for good management and corporate governance are why companies exist and what determines and legitimates the existence of business companies. Many have offered their own versions of the answer, and, as in other chapters, we will begin with a critical analysis of the major positions that have sought to respond to the question of why companies exist. We will take from them whatever elements are compatible with a company centered on the person, with an integral vision, avoiding limiting ourselves to explanations that are strictly economical, sociological, or psychological.The view of business has much to do with the conception of society (6.1). Radical individualism, with its atomistic view of society, understands the company as an aggregate of individuals joined by exclusively contractual bonds, or else groups of stakeholders linked by their respective interests. At the other extreme, there are political philosophies that see the business as a homogenous whole, into which persons all but disappear. Classical liberalism sees the firm simply as a property which contracts and demands fiduciary duties from its managers, ignoring it as a social entity in which conscious, free, and sociable beings associate with one another, joined not merely by contracts or self-interest, but also by their relationality and social nature. They are persons capable of cooperating and creating communities for the sake of some common end, the realization of which redounds to the good of all the persons involved in the company, not only the “property owners.”Returning to the question of why a business exists in the first place, it is argued that one of the most complete accounts of why any reality exists is Aristotle’s theory of the four causes, or “explanations,” called by him the material, formal, efficient, and final causes. However, this method has been largely neglected; here we seek to recover it to interpret the company from a humanist person-centered perspective.In the Aristotelian approach, the material cause refers to the basic elements that constitute the business: these include persons and resources. From here we derive related practical demands: on the one hand, with the dignity and human development of persons for work in the business, and, on the other, of the right to property and its social function.The formal cause structures the material cause. It is argued that the formal cause of the company is the existing cooperative relationships, which transforms persons in a social unity, endowed with resources, under an authority, pursuing the business primary purpose related to the production and/or distribution of products and value creation. This unity of people with resources is an organization, a social institution, and a community of persons. In the formal cause must be included several groups of people (sometimes a single person) interacting with the company and with a relevant role in the company activity. The significance of these groups of people depends on each situation but generally includes employees, shareholders, customers, suppliers, local communities where the company operates or broader communities, government and regulatory bodies, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). These groups can be called “relationholders,” rather than the usual term of “stakeholders,” because they do not only have a “stake,” but a relationship, which often is much more than a stake.The efficient cause of the company refers to the activity of those agents who, in an immediate way, make the existence of the company possible. This cause may be identified, in the first place, with people who are working in the company, including operative, managerial, and governance work, along with the activity of people (stockholders, family owners, investors) who provide material means (capital) for the work.The final cause is the company’s purpose, which expresses that which gives meaning to the business company as something distinct from other social institutions or communities – that which pinpoints the business’s specific contribution to the common good. This purpose is specified through a double mission: an external, regarding direct impacts of the company on society and internal one, which includes effect inside of the company.The chapter concludes emphasizing the necessity of further humanistic person-centered research on management, governance, and leadership and for a deeper understanding the company’s role in society and within the economic system.

Business arises within society; it operates within society, interacts with society and carries out its activity in society. Society offers business infrastructures, fosters education (which has its repercussions for business), promulgates laws and establishes juridical guarantees for the operation of business, sees to monetary stability, defense, and the security of social relations, among other actions business counts upon. The most obvious thing business does for society is to offer products and services under conditions that make them more accessible than they would otherwise be, to create employment, generate wealth, and pay taxes. But this is not all. Companies lend dynamism to the economy and the activity of other companies and facilitate learning and social relations; they take on challenges and serve as channels for productive investment and innovation. Businesses, besides, are not alien to the culture or cultures around them; with their own cultures, they can themselves be catalysts for cultural change. Businesses also come into relation with the natural environment, impacting it in various ways: by taking raw materials, polluting, leaving residue behind, and at times failing to respect environmental diversity – but they can also be sensitive to the environment and care for it.The business-society relationship, then, appears to be of great importance. This requires that we understand what society is, and what role business plays in it. As with any subject, there are different versions of what is meant by “society,” some of them very influential. For some, society is nothing more than a name with no content – a mere aggregate of individuals – while for others it is a whole in which persons become enormously diluted. These are the positions of radical individualism and positions close to collectivism. The alternative posited here holds that society is a social entity that really exists in those who comprise it united by mutual bonds. The society is neither a mere sum of individuals, nor a homogeneous whole, but a heterogeneous and fully diverse real entity. In such an entity, persons are acknowledged in their dignity and freedom and in their participation in the good of society as a whole. Under this perspective the common good provides a crucial orientation for society and human communities since it lends moral legitimacy to the various articulations of social life and economic activity.The relations between business and the natural and human environment are also relevant. We will study this relationship from the humanist point of view, centered on the person, and contrast it with other positions. Then we will analyze the concept of sustainability, which in essence is a “vertical” vision of the common good, which considers future effects on the natural and social environment and impacts of current activities on future generations.The final section of this chapter is devoted to reflecting on the social and ecological responsibilities of business companies within society and the market economy, reviewing certain controversies and misunderstandings and offering a series of criteria to aid in taking these responsibilities seriously.

Ethics is related to the human experience of morality and its object is providing a systematic on good and bad. Rational and systematic reflection on morality began in ancient Greece, although earlier religions and wisdom traditions have already been given ethical precepts and encouraged virtues. The ancient philosophers were especially attentive to the notion of the good, and to the virtues generated by good actions, which in turn give rise to eudaimonia: human excellence or plenitude, with the resulting inner happiness.The virtues are also important in the Christian tradition, based on following Jesus Christ and the supreme precept of love (agapē) of God and neighbor. In the Middle Ages, people continued to consider ethics with a focus on virtues emphasizing their connection with the natural moral law discovered by reason and enhanced by faith.From the Enlightenment onward, and even earlier, there was a significant turn in which the virtues were more and more marginalized. Ethical reflection was targeted to the evaluation of actions, taking rational, ethical norms or principles as a reference point, or else, in another current of thought, centered on moral sentiments. In the final third of the twentieth century, virtue ethics, especially along Aristotelian lines, was reintroduced and found growing acceptance. Today, several ethical theories exist side by side, with a fragmented vision of morality, limiting themselves to virtues, duties, consequences, values, and moral sentiments.Here it is proposed Integral Person-based Ethics, as a conceptual approach oriented to the human growth of each person and to all persons, which includes goods (ethical values), norms for right conduct (including generic principles), and virtues (the inner strength to conduct oneself well). These three elements are mutually related. Basic human goods presented by practical reason (reinforced by the virtue of practical wisdom) entail a normative imperative to act in accordance with them. Virtues are acquired through the intentional performance of good actions, and once possessed, facilitate seeking out and doing the good. Because the centrality of virtues, this approach could be ternmed Personalist Virtue Ethics.It is argued that seeking the good requires recognizing each objective identity around one and treating them with goodwill in a manner consistent with the intrinsic value of each reality; that means rational benevolence, reinforced with practical wisdom. Ethical behavior based on wise benevolence includes recognition, goodwill toward all, and love of benevolence with personal beings with certain bond. An appropriate treatment with people requires considering human dignity and human flourishing, as well as social conditions favoring such flourishing (4.4.1). In dealing with non-human living beings, ethical behavior requires consideration to each identity, beyond mere utility. Openness to reality leads one to acknowledge transcendent and giving to God a proper treatment.Wise benevolence entails virtues which directly or indirectly help one to treat others rightly. Virtues can be grouped into three categories: (1) Practical wisdom and related virtues, as driver of other virtues, (2) relational virtues, directly oriented to deal with other identities, and (3) virtues of self-mastery, as fortitude (courage, patience, among others) and self-moderation, which favor one to act with benevolence.Integral Person-based Ethics includes principles related to goods and virtues, including the Personalist Principle, presented here, and the Principle of the Common Good, which will be presented in another chapter (6.2.3), and virtues.A basic benevolence-based virtue in dealing with people is justice, by giving to each one what is due. Other virtues, such as mercy, care, and friendly service, mainly refer to people closest to oneself, in an ordered fashion, with various degrees of intensity, according to the judgments of practical wisdom.

As noted in the Introduction, under the concept of company, we will group together a variety of institutions which are all associations of people with a common purpose, and who are organized and joined together to achieve specific, declared goals. In a business context, they aim to carry out commercial or industrial activities, including the production, distribution, or consumption of products or services (This definition includes big companies or corporations, with complex organizations sometimes worldwide, and middle and small enterprises with not so complex organization).Our goal in this first chapter is to review how human beings have been considered in business throughout history, within companies or similar institutions, along with some general remarks on historical context. The chapter begins with a brief review of medieval guilds, the activity of merchants in the Commercial Revolution, and the emergence of chartered companies within the system termed mercantilism. It continues with a look at factory workers in the first and second Industrial Revolutions (1764 to 1914). The following section focuses on the place of the person in significant management theories once managers began to play a crucial role in leading business organizations while subject to scarcely any control (approximately 1915 to 1975). During this period, people went from being seen as producers, with a labor cost, to being viewed as human resources, with a focus on using human capabilities and the possibilities of motivating them to improve the bottom line. Some more human perspectives were also introduced during this period. The last section focuses on more recent situations, including the influence of shareholder capitalism and some recent attempts at humanizing business, such as some promising initiatives proposed by practitioners, academic developments, and claims in favor of humanizing business put forward by international organizations and certain moral voices. The chapter concludes with the challenge of putting persons at the center of the company, not only for its contribution to profits but above all for the sake of people themselves.

Economic activity – including business – is first and foremost a human activity, one with ethical content; after all, it involves persons – the origin and end of the activity – as well as environmental effects. However, the integration of ethics into economic activity is problematic, as it is into decision-making in business. It has been so throughout history, even amounting to a total separation between ethics and economics, either because of the way economics is understood or because of the ethical theories adopted.Ever since the 1970s, a movement on behalf of business ethics has arisen, with the goal of integrating ethical theories into the practice of business. Nevertheless, such “integration,” in too many cases, has been nothing but an add-on, a way of understanding business with ethical theories tacked on, extrinsic to any economic action. Moreover, ethics is frequently presented as a series of prohibitions rather than a guide for human excellence.In this chapter, after discussing such problematic perspectives on integrating ethics into economic activity, we review certain key elements of Adam Smith, so influential in economic and business thought, with regard to ethics in economic activity and business decision-making. As alternative, we begin with a careful analysis of interpersonal relations in the context of business relations. Then we argue about the need for a comprehensive rationality in economic activity, not limiting it to that provided by the instrumental reason, which is necessary but not sufficient; we must reflect from theoretical reason, which seeks to know reality, and on practical reason, which guides our action toward what is most convenient all things considered. We also underlined the roles of motivations and the learning to which actions give rise, including virtues. We emphasize the trust that can be created by acting with benevolent motivation, and the concomitant effect on the relationship between the interacting agents. The reinforcement of the “relational bond” that results, together with the virtues that arise, will facilitate right future interactions.The foregoing analysis is about decision-making in business, carried out with the triple rationality mentioned, as well as the help of the virtues. In this approach, ethics is at the core of business decision-making, based on practical wisdom and benevolence-based virtues, as well as the concern for achieving satisfactory economic results with efficiency. Several factors, including generation of trust, loyalty, and willingness of cooperation lead one to think that ethics and long-term efficiency are fully intertwined. This opens up new horizons for a full integration of ethics into business theory, which should be developed in the future.

Global Corporate Citizenship (GCC) continues to become increasingly popular in large corporations. However, this concept has rarely been considered in small and medium size enterprises (SMEs). A case study of a Norwegian clothing company illustrates how GCC can be also applied to small companies. This case study also shows that SMEs can be very innovative in exercising corporate citizenship, without necessarily following the patterns of large multinational companies. The company studied engages as partner in some voluntary labor initiatives promoted by the government, employs people in marginal situations, and exerts influence for the adoption of good working conditions in its supply chain. Environmental issues and actions of solidarity are also considered within a global scope. Ethics of care and concern for specific aspects of the common good seem crucial as GCC drivers in this company, as do personal values, character, and leadership of the owner-manager of the firm.

Most ethical studies on gift giving in business are limited to the application of rationalist ethical principles through a “third‐person” judgment to condemn certain practices such as bribes or manipulative actions, or to question the morality of certain commercial gifts or actions in corporate philanthropy. Such ethical analyses are generally based on extrinsic principles that lead to a dichotomous discussion on the morality of gift‐giving in terms of ethically acceptable and unacceptable gifts. Much less attention has been paid to the gift giver's “first‐person” moral judgment. Thus, this paper contributes to this vacuum by drawing from Thomas Aquinas's approach to internal human acts and their moral evaluation. One of Aquinas's crucial points is his distinction between the object chosen (finis operis) and the intention of the agent (finis operantis) as a structural mental unity. From this perspective, the paper proposes a typology of gift giving, which aids reflection when making personal moral judgments in a variety of situations. Accompanied by illustrative examples, eight types of gift‐giving acts are identified and grouped into three categories: ethically unacceptable giving (bribery and manipulative and malevolent gifts), ethically acceptable giving (instrumental and reciprocal gifts), and ethically excellent giving (gratitude, gratuitous, and solidarity gifts).

Work Integration Social Enterprises (WISE) are a means of redressing injustices that People With Mental Illness and/or Intellectual Disability (PWMI/ID) face in the labor market. As the field’s understanding of WISE improves, many have argued for the need to study their underlying philosophies and ethical foundations. We present a case study of a WISE for PWMI/ID that responds to a humanistic-personalist framework. This framework is based on the consideration of several features of the person: their wholeness, uniqueness, intrinsic dignity, innate rights, and capacity for permanent development. Under this perspective, human work entails dignity because it is a potential source of meaning and personal growth. The humanistic-personalist framework is more comprehensive than other approaches presented in the literature, based on justice and human rights or care ethics, thereby advancing our knowledge of how WISE may provide economically viable and meaningful work experiences to underserved communities. Drawing from this humanistic-personalist perspective, we provide six criteria that can serve as a normative framework for organizations, particularly WISE for PWMI/ID. The case study focuses on La Fageda, a 40-year-old Spanish WISE that has achieved significant social and economic success. La Fageda is based on a sound understanding of the human person. From its foundations and practices, three pillars are identified: the rehabilitating power of work, the practice of designing individual itineraries, and the pursuit of economic success as a means to social success, which is the project’s mission.

One conventional view of businesses is to reduce them to mere performers of economic transactions in an exercise of exchange based on the “logic of self‐interest,” and under the criterion do ut des, meaning “I give in order that you may give.” Drawing from personalist philosophy, this article argues that financial and organizational interactions are encounters, relations between persons, not mere economic transactions. Furthermore, people involved in business have the capacity to establish relations of gratuity with others under the criterion do propter alterum, that is, “give to the other as another,” without expecting a return. This criterion is at the core of the “logic of gift.” We argue that giving authentic gifts is intrinsically good, since it contributes to the human flourishing of those who practice this behavior. Implementing the “logic of gift” is also beneficial for the company because it contributes to humanizing the company. In addition, applying the logic of gift will probably bring about trust and social cohesion between people, with positive consequences for business performance, which is consistent with previous findings.

Humanism in business is not only an alternative to economism but a way to human excellence. Humanism presented here revolves around the rich notion of “human person”, keystone of modern personalist philosophy and Catholic Social Teaching. From this perspective this book is offered to everyone, believer and nonbeliever alike. The person-centered humanism considers the human-wholeness, individual and relational, with subjectivity, self-determination, openness to transcendence, and with capacity not only to possess but also to give. It also highlights the uniqueness of each person, endowed with a high constitutive dignity and in continuous process of flourishing toward human plenitude. An attitude of respect and good will is due to non-personal beings, while persons deserve to be treated with justice and even with love of benevolence. The book is prepared in dialogue with mainstream of thought in business and business ethics and focused on exploring ways to improve some conventional views. It includes some proposals such as a person-based ethics, ethics understood as intrinsic to business activity, the consideration of the company as an organized community of persons, and the purpose of the company oriented toward the common good through a double mission, internal and external. It is also suggested substituting the notion of “stakeholder” for the richer one of “relationholder.”

Numerous ethical theories have been proposed as a foundation of business ethics, and this often brings about appreciable perplexity. This article seeks to identify specific problems for a sound foundation of this discipline. A first problem is this multiplicity of ethical theories, each with its own metaethics, often accepted without a serious discussion of their philosophical grounds. A second problem is the fragmentation of theories; some centred on duties or obligations, others on consequences, virtues, or moral sentiments. In addition, some theories focus on universal principles, while others take the singularity of each situation as their focal point. A third problem is that not every ethical theory covers the personal, organizational and societal dimensions of business ethics, and this introduces reductionism. These problems cannot be satisfactorily addressed through ‘ethical pluralism’, in which all theories are accepted, without falling into ethical relativism. ‘Ethical pragmatism’, which welcomes any ethical theory only on the basis of their practically, is also questioned. Furthermore, there is the problem of integrating ethics into business theory, which is often extrinsic to the economic function. After analysing these problems, the article concludes by exploring some proposals that might serve to build a sound and complete ethical theory which includes human goods (objective values), principles (or norms) and virtues. The necessity of reconsidering the human action for a closer integration of ethics into business theory is also suggested.