In my role as a teacher, I am aware of the difficulties inherent in training future managers. exposed from an early age to the race for academic excellence, sometimes even reinforced by the elitism of certain training courses, our students may be led to pay attention to what makes their curriculum vitae worthwhile; this is then seen as an extension of the school report card. Independently of their personal aspirations, extracurricular skills, interests and values, they tend to give priority to areas of excellence and justify their choice of training and internships solely on the basis of the prestige of partner institutions and companies. The key word becomes professional success, i.e. the material or symbolic “asset” represented by good grades, then diplomas, then the enrichment of the curriculum vitae, then career development. Meaning is forgotten, denied, sometimes ridiculed, and as Blaise Pascal expressed it: “we never actually live, but hope to live, and since we are always planning how to be happy, it is inevitable that we should never be so” (Thoughts, 1670).

​

   If we teach future managers who are entering a university or school that they will have the job of coordinating individual actions with a view to contributing to the economic performance of their organization, they may never grasp the meaning of their lives, nor that of their employees. It seems that students find it difficult to see management as a profession as such.

Yet it may be that management is precisely a profession that gives the opportunity to experience the different dimensions of the common good and meaning : indeed, it is only possible to help one's employees to give meaning to their work on the condition that one has opened oneself up to the different dimensions of the common good and meaning.

Concretely, how can training help students to seek the common good and meaning? To answer this question, we put into perspective the philosophical requirements suggested by Platonist and Aristotelian Greek philosophy (that is, respect for rules, dialectics, imitation and deliberation) and the structural barriers evident in the contemporary business school context (hegemony of instrumental theories, disciplinary compartmentalization, hegemony of educational technologies, and academism or professionalization excesses). We suggest certain structural conditions to advance ethical training.

​

   Firstly, defined by Plato and Aristotle as crucial for the acquisition of virtue, it is argued that respect for the legal rules is considered an integral part of ethical training. In addition to the emphasis on law courses, ethical training presupposes that respect for law is not undermined in other courses by a tendency to circumvent legislation as a principle of action. It implies that as a group the teachers-instructors are all aware of the role of the law as an essential intermediary order between the economic and ethical worlds. This regard for law does not lead to advocating a blind obedience to current laws and to supporting a legal positivism. Rooted in an ethical reflection implying prudence and practical wisdom, knowledge of law actually means paying attention to ethical and moral values which may underlie legal rules and developing an ability to question law, and even to disobey it in cases where these values have been violated.

​

   Secondly, the three other orientations – dialectics, imitation and deliberation – can be stimulated by the development of cultural or ethical transversal teachings. Instruction in the humanities and social sciences such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology and history can all provide an important cultural horizon that helps the future manager appreciate and embrace the reflective process. Courses in business ethics, business and society, or corporate social responsibility can help to question the ethical criteria of decisions that every manager makes in their professional life, provided they are offered in a deliberative and interdisciplinary fashion.

​

   We suggest a clear pedagogical protocol for all courses in business schools that can be divided into the following four steps:

​

1) Clarification of the pedagogical objectives at the beginning of the course (i.e. exemplary clarity of the teacher; coherence between the announced and implemented pedagogical rules; meeting with the teacher-instructor prior to any implementation of educational technologies).

​

2) Choice of theoretical content based more broadly on areas other than exclusively instrumental theories (i.e. confrontation between instrumental and non-instrumental theories; reference to law in all disciplines; learning law as an ethical reference and not merely as an economic tool or a constraint).

​

3) Choice of models of conduct (i.e. choice of exemplary ethical behavior; choice of humanistic or meaningful organizations).

​

4) Complex and realistic case studies (i.e. questioning the different aspects of a problem by mobilizing a variety of disciplines; questioning the ends and the means when confronted with a dilemma).

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-016-3398-x

​

Following the discussion in the literature on virtue ethics, our study aims to explore the possibility to use a portfolio of virtues in business ethics education (Frémeaux, Donato & Noël-Lemaitre, 2023). This portfolio could encourage students to engage in a contemplative, imitative, and reflexive approach that is conducive to the development of moral excellence. Its purpose is to lead students to think about their abilities to :

- Provide a certain amount of work that is neither excessive nor insufficient (e.g., take into account one’s physical and psychological needs as well as one’s aspirations in terms of work–life balance)

- Resist temptations (e.g., resist acrasia)

- Opt for a virtuous way of working (e.g., work seriously, carefully, and efficiently)

- Take time before writing (e.g., time to think before constructing ideas)

- Make the right decision (e.g., deliberate before making a choice)

- Learning from others (e.g., asking questions)

- Accepting the point of view of others (e.g., listening to differing opinions; admitting mistakes)

- Giving freely (e.g., helping others in the performance of their tasks)

- Demonstrate patience in the relationship with others (e.g., patience with those who work less quickly)

- Expressing tactfully what we think (e.g., expressing appreciation or disappointment; expressing disagreement)

- Confronting conflicts and considering solutions (e.g., seeking alternative solutions)

​

https://hal.science/hal-04318901v1