Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-29-2007 18:59
    Since much of the discussion seems to center on economics and functional views of entrepreneurship, I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his very general theory of human action. However, the value-neutrality of the message is especially valid in the case of entrepreneurial action:
     
    Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing scales of value according to which man should act but does not necessarily always act. They claim for themselves the vocation of telling right from wrong and of advising man concerning what he should aim at as the supreme good. They are normative disciplines aiming at the cognition of what ought to be. They are not neutral with regard to facts; they judge them from the point of view of freely adopted standards.
     
    This is not the attitude of praxeology and economics. They are fully aware of the fact that the ultimate ends of human action are not open to examination from any absolute standard. Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are purely subjective, they differ with various people and with the same people at various moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics deal with the means for the attainment of ends chosen by the acting individuals. They do not express any opinion with regard to such problems as whether or not sybaritism is better than asceticism. They apply to the means only one yardstick, viz., whether or not they are suitable to attain the ends at which the acting individuals aim.
     
    The notions of abnormality and perversity therefore have no place in economics. It does not say that a man is perverse because he prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial, and the pleasant. It says only that he is different from other people; that he likes what others detest; that he considers useful what others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in enduring pain which others avoid because it hurts them.
     
     
    Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed in ethical terms?
     
     
    /Henrik

    __________________________________________________________________________

    Henrik Berglund

    Postdoctoral  fellow

     

    Department of Technology Management and Economics

    Chalmers University of Technology

       Phone     : +46 (0)708 128 138

       Email     : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se

       Skype     : henrik.k.berglund

       Web       : www.henrikberglund.com

     

    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!


  • 2.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-30-2007 07:21
    Enterpreneurs tend to be portrayed as "evil" rather than "good" in TV entertainment (even in the supposedly ent-freindly USA); see:
     
    Theberge, L. (Ed), 1981. Crooks, conmen and clowns: businessmen in TV entertainment. Washington, DC: The Media Institute.
    Lichter, R. et al., 1991. Watching Ameirca. New York: Prentice-Hall.
     
    Per Davidsson| Research Director | Faculty of Business | Room Z757 | Phone: +61 7 3138 6631
     | Fax: +61 7 3138 5250 | Mobile: you wish... | Professor of Entrepreneurship | Brisbane Graduate School of Business  | Room B522 | Phone: +61 7 3138 2051 | Fax: +61 7 3138 1299 | | Mobile: you wish... | Email: per.davidsson@qut.edu.au | Queensland University of Technology | www.qut.edu.au |CRICOS No. 00213J


    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv on behalf of Henrik Berglund
    Sent: Tue 30/10/2007 8:58 AM
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Since much of the discussion seems to center on economics and functional views of entrepreneurship, I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his very general theory of human action. However, the value-neutrality of the message is especially valid in the case of entrepreneurial action:
     
    Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing scales of value according to which man should act but does not necessarily always act. They claim for themselves the vocation of telling right from wrong and of advising man concerning what he should aim at as the supreme good. They are normative disciplines aiming at the cognition of what ought to be. They are not neutral with regard to facts; they judge them from the point of view of freely adopted standards.
     
    This is not the attitude of praxeology and economics. They are fully aware of the fact that the ultimate ends of human action are not open to examination from any absolute standard. Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are purely subjective, they differ with various people and with the same people at various moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics deal with the means for the attainment of ends chosen by the acting individuals. They do not express any opinion with regard to such problems as whether or not sybaritism is better than asceticism. They apply to the means only one yardstick, viz., whether or not they are suitable to attain the ends at which the acting individuals aim.
     
    The notions of abnormality and perversity therefore have no place in economics. It does not say that a man is perverse because he prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial, and the pleasant. It says only that he is different from other people; that he likes what others detest; that he considers useful what others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in enduring pain which others avoid because it hurts them.
     
     
    Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed in ethical terms?
     
     
    /Henrik

    __________________________________________________________________________

    Henrik Berglund

    Postdoctoral  fellow

     

    Department of Technology Management and Economics

    Chalmers University of Technology

       Phone     : +46 (0)708 128 138

       Email     : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se

       Skype     : henrik.k.berglund

       Web       : www.henrikberglund.com

     

    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!


  • 3.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-30-2007 09:30

    I had emailed <st1:givenname w:st="on">Andrew</st1:givenname> privately but since there is so much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought that I should email the group.

     

    <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Rob</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Smith</st1:sn></st2:personname> and I have a paper coming out in the next edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time with a group of <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:city w:st="on">London</st2:city></st2:place> gangsters collecting data for this and were surprise to find that one notorious, but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself morally just!

     

    The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of being enterprising.

     

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Alistair</st1:givenname> <st1:middlename w:st="on">R</st1:middlename> <st1:sn w:st="on">Anderson</st1:sn> and <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Rob</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Smith</st1:sn></st2:personname>

     

    Abstract

     

    This paper explores the morality associated with entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such instrumental views may the miss out much of the nature of enterprise and how it is understood. Consequently we propose that a socially constructed perspective, based upon the meanings of entrepreneurship, may help to understand the morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and clearly present a moral space. This space lies between the individual and society and is normatively articulated in entrepreneurial discourses. We develop a tentative framework which links values and outcomes that shows how "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say that which resonates with a socially approved moral dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a socially constructed view. The empirical part of the paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:city w:st="on">London</st2:city></st2:place> gangster. Our analysis shows that to be judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public perceptions entail examining both moral means and moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral imperative in entrepreneurship.

     

     

    Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested

     

    <st1:givenname w:st="on">Alistair</st1:givenname>

    From: <st1:givenname w:st="on">Entrepreneurship</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Division Listserv</st1:sn> [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Henrik</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Berglund</st1:sn></st2:personname>
    Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

     

    Since much of the discussion seems to center on economics and functional views of entrepreneurship, I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his very general theory of human action. However, the value-neutrality of the message is especially valid in the case of entrepreneurial action:

     

    Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing scales of value according to which man should act but does not necessarily always act. They claim for themselves the vocation of telling right from wrong and of advising man concerning what he should aim at as the supreme good. They are normative disciplines aiming at the cognition of what ought to be. They are not neutral with regard to facts; they judge them from the point of view of freely adopted standards.

     

    This is not the attitude of praxeology and economics. They are fully aware of the fact that the ultimate ends of human action are not open to examination from any absolute standard. Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are purely subjective, they differ with various people and with the same people at various moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics deal with the means for the attainment of ends chosen by the acting individuals. They do not express any opinion with regard to such problems as whether or not sybaritism is better than asceticism. They apply to the means only one yardstick, viz., whether or not they are suitable to attain the ends at which the acting individuals aim.

     

    The notions of abnormality and perversity therefore have no place in economics. It does not say that a man is perverse because he prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial, and the pleasant. It says only that he is different from other people; that he likes what others detest; that he considers useful what others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in enduring pain which others avoid because it hurts them.

     

     

    Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed in ethical terms?

     

     

    /Henrik

    __________________________________________________________________________

    <st2:personname w:st="on"><st1:givenname w:st="on">Henrik</st1:givenname> <st1:sn w:st="on">Berglund</st1:sn></st2:personname>

    Postdoctoral  fellow

     

    Department of Technology Management and Economics

    <st2:place w:st="on"><st2:placename w:st="on">Chalmers</st2:placename> <st2:placetype w:st="on">University</st2:placetype></st2:place> of Technology

       Phone     : +46 (0)708 128 138

       Email     : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se

       Skype     : henrik.k.berglund

       Web       : www.henrikberglund.com

     

    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO! ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!


  • 4.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-30-2007 15:33
    Me, me!! You always are doing marvelous stuff, Alistair.

    The thought of you hanging out with gangsters... priceless! (But glad you are ok!)

    --
    Keep entrepreneuring!
    Norris

    Norris F. Krueger, Jr., Ph.D.
    "How can I help you to help grow entrepreneurs?"    
    (208) 440-3747; skype: norris.krueger
           "I criticize by creation, not by finding fault" -Cicero

    On 10/30/07, a.r.anderson@rgu.ac.uk <a.r.anderson@rgu.ac.uk > wrote:

    I had emailed Andrew privately but since there is so much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought that I should email the group.

     

    Rob Smith and I have a paper coming out in the next edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time with a group of London gangsters collecting data for this and were surprise to find that one notorious, but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself morally just!

     

    The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of being enterprising.

     

    Alistair R Anderson and Rob Smith

     

    Abstract

     

    This paper explores the morality associated with entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such instrumental views may the miss out much of the nature of enterprise and how it is understood. Consequently we propose that a socially constructed perspective, based upon the meanings of entrepreneurship, may help to understand the morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and clearly present a moral space. This space lies between the individual and society and is normatively articulated in entrepreneurial discourses. We develop a tentative framework which links values and outcomes that shows how "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say that which resonates with a socially approved moral dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a socially constructed view. The empirical part of the paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial London gangster. Our analysis shows that to be judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public perceptions entail examining both moral means and moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral imperative in entrepreneurship.

     

     

    Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested

     

    Alistair

    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Henrik Berglund
    Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
     Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

     

    Since much of the discussion seems to center on economics and functional views of entrepreneurship, I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his very general theory of human action. However, the value-neutrality of the message is especially valid in the case of entrepreneurial action:

     

    Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing scales of value according to which man should act but does not necessarily always act. They claim for themselves the vocation of telling right from wrong and of advising man concerning what he should aim at as the supreme good. They are normative disciplines aiming at the cognition of what ought to be. They are not neutral with regard to facts; they judge them from the point of view of freely adopted standards.

     

    This is not the attitude of praxeology and economics. They are fully aware of the fact that the ultimate ends of human action are not open to examination from any absolute standard. Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are purely subjective, they differ with various people and with the same people at various moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics deal with the means for the attainment of ends chosen by the acting individuals. They do not express any opinion with regard to such problems as whether or not sybaritism is better than asceticism. They apply to the means only one yardstick, viz., whether or not they are suitable to attain the ends at which the acting individuals aim.

     

    The notions of abnormality and perversity therefore have no place in economics. It does not say that a man is perverse because he prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial, and the pleasant. It says only that he is different from other people; that he likes what others detest; that he considers useful what others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in enduring pain which others avoid because it hurts them.

     

     

    Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed in ethical terms?

     

     

    /Henrik

    __________________________________________________________________________

    Henrik Berglund

    Postdoctoral  fellow

     

    Department of Technology Management and Economics

    Chalmers University of Technology

       Phone     : +46 (0)708 128 138

       Email     : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se

       Skype     : henrik.k.berglund

       Web       : www.henrikberglund.com

     

    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO! ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!

    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!


  • 5.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-30-2007 20:12
    Alistair,

    This sounds like a very interesting paper. I would be interested in reading it. Thanks for sharing this on the listserve as it adds an interesting dimension to the discussion.

    Of course, now I have to ask, at what point do we cross the line from entrepreneurism to criminal activity? An entrepreneurial villain? It is interesting terminology, but it would seem to me you did your research on a group of gangsters not entrepreneurs. Or would you argue that they are entrepreneurs who have used their power for evil instead of good?

    Why is it we continue to muddy the waters by allowing the terms entrepreneur and entrepreneurial to be hijacked by every group that comes along including criminals? When one engages in illegal activity for financial gain why do we still want to call them entrepreneurial? There is a perfectly good word for what they are doing - criminal. Yet, entrepreneurial has become the adjective of choice.

    Which brings us full circle - was Al Capone a notorious criminal engaging in illegal commercial activities some under the guise of legitimate commerce (usually for the illegal purposes of money laundering) or an evil entrepreneur? A ruthless thug or an entrepreneurial villain? Both?

    Just curious...

    Chuck
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management
    Executive Director, UC Center for Entrepreneurship
    Education & Research
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221

    ---- Original message ----
    >Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:30:20 +0000
    >From: a.r.anderson@RGU.AC.UK
    >Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"
    >To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    >
    > I had emailed Andrew privately but since there is so
    > much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought
    > that I should email the group.
    >
    > Rob Smith and I have a paper coming out in the next
    > edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development
    > which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a
    > moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there
    > is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a
    > socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time
    > with a group of London gangsters collecting data for
    > this and were surprise to find that one notorious,
    > but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself
    > morally just!
    >
    >
    >
    > The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration
    > of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of
    > being enterprising.
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair R Anderson and Rob Smith
    >
    >
    >
    > Abstract
    >
    >
    >
    > This paper explores the morality associated with
    > entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is
    > no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such
    > instrumental views may the miss out much of the
    > nature of enterprise and how it is understood.
    > Consequently we propose that a socially constructed
    > perspective, based upon the meanings of
    > entrepreneurship, may help to understand the
    > morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a
    > lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of
    > the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and
    > clearly present a moral space. This space lies
    > between the individual and society and is
    > normatively articulated in entrepreneurial
    > discourses. We develop a tentative framework which
    > links values and outcomes that shows how
    > "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say
    > that which resonates with a socially approved moral
    > dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a
    > socially constructed view. The empirical part of the
    > paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a
    > local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent
    > man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial
    > London gangster. Our analysis shows that to be
    > judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act
    > entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public
    > perceptions entail examining both moral means and
    > moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral
    > imperative in entrepreneurship.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------
    >
    > From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
    > [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of
    > Henrik Berglund
    > Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
    > To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a
    > social "evil"
    >
    >
    >
    > Since much of the discussion seems to center on
    > economics and functional views of entrepreneurship,
    > I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises
    > might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his
    > very general theory of human action. However, the
    > value-neutrality of the message is especially valid
    > in the case of entrepreneurial action:
    >
    >
    >
    > Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing
    > scales of value according to which man should
    > act but does not necessarily always act. They
    > claim for themselves the vocation of telling
    > right from wrong and of advising man concerning
    > what he should aim at as the supreme good. They
    > are normative disciplines aiming at the
    > cognition of what ought to be. They are not
    > neutral with regard to facts; they judge them
    > from the point of view of freely adopted
    > standards.
    >
    >
    >
    > This is not the attitude of praxeology and
    > economics. They are fully aware of the fact that
    > the ultimate ends of human action are not open
    > to examination from any absolute standard.
    > Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are
    > purely subjective, they differ with various
    > people and with the same people at various
    > moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics
    > deal with the means for the attainment of ends
    > chosen by the acting individuals. They do not
    > express any opinion with regard to such problems
    > as whether or not sybaritism is better than
    > asceticism. They apply to the means only one
    > yardstick, viz., whether or not they are
    > suitable to attain the ends at which the acting
    > individuals aim.
    >
    >
    >
    > The notions of abnormality and perversity
    > therefore have no place in economics. It does
    > not say that a man is perverse because he
    > prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and
    > the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial,
    > and the pleasant. It says only that he is
    > different from other people; that he likes what
    > others detest; that he considers useful what
    > others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in
    > enduring pain which others avoid because it
    > hurts them.
    >
    > http://www.mises.org/story/2711
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship
    > differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means
    > for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should
    > entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed
    > in ethical terms?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > /Henrik
    >
    > __________________________________________________________________________
    >
    > Henrik Berglund
    >
    > Postdoctoral fellow
    >
    >
    >
    > Department of Technology Management and Economics
    >
    > Chalmers University of Technology
    >
    > Phone : +46 (0)708 128 138
    >
    > Email : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se
    >
    > Skype : henrik.k.berglund
    >
    > Web : www.henrikberglund.com
    >
    >
    >
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship & Strategic Management
    Executive Director, U.C. Center for Entrepreneurship Education & Research
    Department of Management
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221-0165
    Phone: 513-556-7123
    Fax: 513-556-5499
    Email: charles.matthews@uc.edu
    www.ucecenter.org

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!


  • 6.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-31-2007 06:25
    Chuck

    There seem to be two issues we need to keep separate (conceptually, at least) here:

    1. the entrepreneur (a person) vs entrepreneurship (a process, activity, behavior or set of behaviors)

    2. legal/illegal vs moral/amoral activities

    Your response to Alistair focuses on the entrepreneur/legal side of this, with the logic that if the activity is 'illegal' then the actor is a criminal not an entrepreneur, and that these are non-overlapping mutually exclusive sets.

    I would argue that the legal/illegal split is socially constructed and institutionally embedded and as a result is not fixed in space or time: activities that are legal today were illegal in the past (eg see the treatment of entrepreneurial activities during Prohibition) and activities that were legal in the past (or believed to be so, in gray areas) are now illegal (see the recent evolution of regulatory attitudes to on-line gaming in the US, for example). To use legality to define entrepreneurs does not seem to me to be helpful (but legality is a necessary constraint to activity in an open and just society, based on the role law plays in the determination and protection of the social good).

    If we change the focus to the behaviors then it seems to me that it is possible, without implying either loss of content or intellectual imperialism, to at least discuss the extent to which entrepreneurial behaviors are evidenced in 'criminal' i.e. non-legal activities - in so doing, as an aside, this may point to that element of entrepreneurial activity which is disruptive and challenging of the established orthodoxy at some (not necessarily Schumpeterian) scale. It is in this context that it makes sense to talk of entrepreneurship as moral/non-moral, where the emphasis is on the 'right' thing to do not just on the 'legal' thing to do (and this is before we get into the ethics debate about when if at all it is appropriate to engage in moral ('right') behavior that is, at that time and in that place, illegal).

    Richard

    Richard T Harrison
    Professor of Management

    Director and Head of School
    Queen's University Management School
    Queen's University Belfast
    25 University Square
    Belfast BT7 1NN
    Northern Ireland, UK

    Tel +44 (0) 28 9097 3621
    r.harrison@qub.ac.uk

    Office:
    Fiona Gaffney
    +44 (0) 28 9097 5025
    f.gaffney@qub.ac.uk

    Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance:
    http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/13691066.asp

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv [mailto:ENTREP@aomlists.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Sent: 31 October 2007 00:12
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Alistair,

    This sounds like a very interesting paper. I would be interested in reading it. Thanks for sharing this on the listserve as it adds an interesting dimension to the discussion.

    Of course, now I have to ask, at what point do we cross the line from entrepreneurism to criminal activity? An entrepreneurial villain? It is interesting terminology, but it would seem to me you did your research on a group of gangsters not entrepreneurs. Or would you argue that they are entrepreneurs who have used their power for evil instead of good?

    Why is it we continue to muddy the waters by allowing the terms entrepreneur and entrepreneurial to be hijacked by every group that comes along including criminals? When one engages in illegal activity for financial gain why do we still want to call them entrepreneurial? There is a perfectly good word for what they are doing - criminal. Yet, entrepreneurial has become the adjective of choice.

    Which brings us full circle - was Al Capone a notorious criminal engaging in illegal commercial activities some under the guise of legitimate commerce (usually for the illegal purposes of money laundering) or an evil entrepreneur? A ruthless thug or an entrepreneurial villain? Both?

    Just curious...

    Chuck
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management
    Executive Director, UC Center for Entrepreneurship
    Education & Research
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221

    ---- Original message ----
    >Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:30:20 +0000
    >From: a.r.anderson@RGU.AC.UK
    >Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"
    >To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    >
    > I had emailed Andrew privately but since there is so
    > much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought
    > that I should email the group.
    >
    > Rob Smith and I have a paper coming out in the next
    > edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development
    > which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a
    > moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there
    > is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a
    > socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time
    > with a group of London gangsters collecting data for
    > this and were surprise to find that one notorious,
    > but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself
    > morally just!
    >
    >
    >
    > The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration
    > of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of
    > being enterprising.
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair R Anderson and Rob Smith
    >
    >
    >
    > Abstract
    >
    >
    >
    > This paper explores the morality associated with
    > entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is
    > no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such
    > instrumental views may the miss out much of the
    > nature of enterprise and how it is understood.
    > Consequently we propose that a socially constructed
    > perspective, based upon the meanings of
    > entrepreneurship, may help to understand the
    > morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a
    > lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of
    > the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and
    > clearly present a moral space. This space lies
    > between the individual and society and is
    > normatively articulated in entrepreneurial
    > discourses. We develop a tentative framework which
    > links values and outcomes that shows how
    > "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say
    > that which resonates with a socially approved moral
    > dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a
    > socially constructed view. The empirical part of the
    > paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a
    > local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent
    > man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial
    > London gangster. Our analysis shows that to be
    > judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act
    > entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public
    > perceptions entail examining both moral means and
    > moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral
    > imperative in entrepreneurship.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------
    >
    > From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
    > [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of
    > Henrik Berglund
    > Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
    > To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a
    > social "evil"
    >
    >
    >
    > Since much of the discussion seems to center on
    > economics and functional views of entrepreneurship,
    > I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises
    > might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his
    > very general theory of human action. However, the
    > value-neutrality of the message is especially valid
    > in the case of entrepreneurial action:
    >
    >
    >
    > Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing
    > scales of value according to which man should
    > act but does not necessarily always act. They
    > claim for themselves the vocation of telling
    > right from wrong and of advising man concerning
    > what he should aim at as the supreme good. They
    > are normative disciplines aiming at the
    > cognition of what ought to be. They are not
    > neutral with regard to facts; they judge them
    > from the point of view of freely adopted
    > standards.
    >
    >
    >
    > This is not the attitude of praxeology and
    > economics. They are fully aware of the fact that
    > the ultimate ends of human action are not open
    > to examination from any absolute standard.
    > Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are
    > purely subjective, they differ with various
    > people and with the same people at various
    > moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics
    > deal with the means for the attainment of ends
    > chosen by the acting individuals. They do not
    > express any opinion with regard to such problems
    > as whether or not sybaritism is better than
    > asceticism. They apply to the means only one
    > yardstick, viz., whether or not they are
    > suitable to attain the ends at which the acting
    > individuals aim.
    >
    >
    >
    > The notions of abnormality and perversity
    > therefore have no place in economics. It does
    > not say that a man is perverse because he
    > prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and
    > the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial,
    > and the pleasant. It says only that he is
    > different from other people; that he likes what
    > others detest; that he considers useful what
    > others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in
    > enduring pain which others avoid because it
    > hurts them.
    >
    > http://www.mises.org/story/2711
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship
    > differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means
    > for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should
    > entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed
    > in ethical terms?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > /Henrik
    >
    > __________________________________________________________________________
    >
    > Henrik Berglund
    >
    > Postdoctoral fellow
    >
    >
    >
    > Department of Technology Management and Economics
    >
    > Chalmers University of Technology
    >
    > Phone : +46 (0)708 128 138
    >
    > Email : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se
    >
    > Skype : henrik.k.berglund
    >
    > Web : www.henrikberglund.com
    >
    >
    >
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship & Strategic Management
    Executive Director, U.C. Center for Entrepreneurship Education & Research
    Department of Management
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221-0165
    Phone: 513-556-7123
    Fax: 513-556-5499
    Email: charles.matthews@uc.edu
    www.ucecenter.org

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!


  • 7.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 10-31-2007 17:13
    I think there is a paper somewhere about 'illegal' entrepreneurship in Nigeria.... though of course, being illegal doesn't mean being immoral (I think it was in the Jrnl of Bus Venturing, 2002, special ed on qualitative research).  There are many many immoral laws in the world.  I think we need a few moral philosophers to contribute to this thread and enlighten us! or possibly confuse us even more!!??

    Microsoft has come under much criticism and some legal rulings for its behaviour - is it being illegal? greedy? highly entrepreneurial?  Some with other companies which have been held up as 'wrong' somehow - Enron???? Nestle? Gap?  the list is long.  Is what Nestle did with baby formula immoral/evil or good for business and the bottom line?  and does it have anything to do with being entrepreneurial?  

    Paola

    On 31 Oct 2007, at 01:12, Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D. wrote:

    Alistair,

    This sounds like a very interesting paper.  I would be interested in reading it.  Thanks for sharing this on the listserve as it adds an interesting dimension to the discussion.

    Of course, now I have to ask, at what point do we cross the line from entrepreneurism to criminal activity?  An entrepreneurial villain?  It is interesting terminology, but it would seem to me you did your research on a group of gangsters not entrepreneurs.  Or would you argue that they are entrepreneurs who have used their power for evil instead of good?

    Why is it we continue to muddy the waters by allowing the terms entrepreneur and entrepreneurial to be hijacked by every group that comes along including criminals?  When one engages in illegal activity for financial gain why do we still want to call them entrepreneurial?  There is a perfectly good word for what they are doing - criminal. Yet, entrepreneurial has become the adjective of choice. 

    Which brings us full circle - was Al Capone a notorious criminal engaging in illegal commercial activities some under the guise of legitimate commerce (usually for the illegal purposes of money laundering) or an evil entrepreneur?  A ruthless thug or an entrepreneurial villain?  Both?

    Just curious...

    Chuck
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management
    Executive Director, UC Center for Entrepreneurship
    Education & Research
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH  45221

    ---- Original message ----
    Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:30:20 +0000
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"  

      I had emailed Andrew privately but since there is so
      much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought
      that I should email the group.

      Rob Smith and I have a paper coming out in the next
      edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development
      which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a
      moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there
      is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a
      socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time
      with a group of London gangsters collecting data for
      this and were surprise to find that one notorious,
      but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself
      morally just!



      The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration
      of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of
      being enterprising.



      Alistair R Anderson and Rob Smith



      Abstract



      This paper explores the morality associated with
      entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is
      no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such
      instrumental views may the miss out much of the
      nature of enterprise and how it is understood.
      Consequently we propose that a socially constructed
      perspective, based upon the meanings of
      entrepreneurship, may help to understand the
      morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a
      lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of
      the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and
      clearly present a moral space. This space lies
      between the individual and society and is
      normatively articulated in entrepreneurial
      discourses. We develop a tentative framework which
      links values and outcomes that shows how
      "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say
      that which resonates with a socially approved moral
      dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a
      socially constructed view. The empirical part of the
      paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a
      local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent
      man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial
      London gangster. Our analysis shows that to be
      judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act
      entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public
      perceptions entail examining both moral means and
      moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral
      imperative in entrepreneurship.





      Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested



      Alistair

      ----------------------------------------------------

      From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
      Henrik Berglund
      Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
      Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a
      social "evil"



      Since much of the discussion seems to center on
      economics and functional views of entrepreneurship,
      I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises
      might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his
      very general theory of human action. However, the
      value-neutrality of the message is especially valid
      in the case of entrepreneurial action:



          Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing
          scales of value according to which man should
          act but does not necessarily always act. They
          claim for themselves the vocation of telling
          right from wrong and of advising man concerning
          what he should aim at as the supreme good. They
          are normative disciplines aiming at the
          cognition of what ought to be. They are not
          neutral with regard to facts; they judge them
          from the point of view of freely adopted
          standards.



          This is not the attitude of praxeology and
          economics. They are fully aware of the fact that
          the ultimate ends of human action are not open
          to examination from any absolute standard.
          Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are
          purely subjective, they differ with various
          people and with the same people at various
          moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics
          deal with the means for the attainment of ends
          chosen by the acting individuals. They do not
          express any opinion with regard to such problems
          as whether or not sybaritism is better than
          asceticism. They apply to the means only one
          yardstick, viz., whether or not they are
          suitable to attain the ends at which the acting
          individuals aim.



          The notions of abnormality and perversity
          therefore have no place in economics. It does
          not say that a man is perverse because he
          prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and
          the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial,
          and the pleasant. It says only that he is
          different from other people; that he likes what
          others detest; that he considers useful what
          others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in
          enduring pain which others avoid because it
          hurts them.






      Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship
      differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means
      for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should
      entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed
      in ethical terms?





      /Henrik

      __________________________________________________________________________

      Henrik Berglund

      Postdoctoral  fellow



      Department of Technology Management and Economics

      Chalmers University of Technology

         Phone     : +46 (0)708 128 138

         Email     : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se

         Skype     : henrik.k.berglund

         Web       : www.henrikberglund.com



      ************************************** This message
      is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
      Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
      Management. Please do not post messages with
      attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
      messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
      auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
      lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
      your subscription options, including joining or
      leaving the list here:
      If you have questions or need help, please contact
      Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
      ************************************** This message
      is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
      Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
      Management. Please do not post messages with
      attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
      messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
      auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
      lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
      your subscription options, including joining or
      leaving the list here:
      If you have questions or need help, please contact
      Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship & Strategic Management
    Executive Director, U.C. Center for Entrepreneurship Education & Research
    Department of Management
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH  45221-0165
    Phone: 513-556-7123
    Fax: 513-556-5499
    www.ucecenter.org

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list.  The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch  jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!

    Paola Grenier

    London School of Economics

    Centre for Civil Society


    ************************************** This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management. Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list. You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here: http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1 If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!


  • 8.  SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Posted 11-01-2007 05:56
    Taking up Richard's point here, I agree that we have to separate the
    ends and the means. Entrepreneurship is a very broad brush and
    entrepreneurs are characterised more by diversity than similarity. What
    seems to compound the problem is the heroic status accorded to
    entrepreneurs, but this is both historically and contextually
    contingent.

    One of my former PhD students, (an American too) Carter Crocket, tackled
    this problem, albeit indirectly. He was interested in trying to
    establish if Aristotle's notion of Virtue had any application in
    understanding contemporary entrepreneurs. He found that "excellence",
    defined and described as Aristotle's sense of purpose did seem to
    matter. Indeed he found that entrepreneurs who pursued this purpose had
    better firms, more profitable and retained staff and customers.

    So perhaps it is not what entrepreneurs do but both what and why they do
    it that reflects whether we can make any judgements about good or evil?

    Alistair

    Alistair R Anderson

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
    [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Harrison
    Sent: 31 October 2007 10:25
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Chuck

    There seem to be two issues we need to keep separate (conceptually, at
    least) here:

    1. the entrepreneur (a person) vs entrepreneurship (a process, activity,
    behavior or set of behaviors)

    2. legal/illegal vs moral/amoral activities

    Your response to Alistair focuses on the entrepreneur/legal side of
    this, with the logic that if the activity is 'illegal' then the actor is
    a criminal not an entrepreneur, and that these are non-overlapping
    mutually exclusive sets.

    I would argue that the legal/illegal split is socially constructed and
    institutionally embedded and as a result is not fixed in space or time:
    activities that are legal today were illegal in the past (eg see the
    treatment of entrepreneurial activities during Prohibition) and
    activities that were legal in the past (or believed to be so, in gray
    areas) are now illegal (see the recent evolution of regulatory attitudes
    to on-line gaming in the US, for example). To use legality to define
    entrepreneurs does not seem to me to be helpful (but legality is a
    necessary constraint to activity in an open and just society, based on
    the role law plays in the determination and protection of the social
    good).

    If we change the focus to the behaviors then it seems to me that it is
    possible, without implying either loss of content or intellectual
    imperialism, to at least discuss the extent to which entrepreneurial
    behaviors are evidenced in 'criminal' i.e. non-legal activities - in so
    doing, as an aside, this may point to that element of entrepreneurial
    activity which is disruptive and challenging of the established
    orthodoxy at some (not necessarily Schumpeterian) scale. It is in this
    context that it makes sense to talk of entrepreneurship as
    moral/non-moral, where the emphasis is on the 'right' thing to do not
    just on the 'legal' thing to do (and this is before we get into the
    ethics debate about when if at all it is appropriate to engage in moral
    ('right') behavior that is, at that time and in that place, illegal).

    Richard

    Richard T Harrison
    Professor of Management

    Director and Head of School
    Queen's University Management School
    Queen's University Belfast
    25 University Square
    Belfast BT7 1NN
    Northern Ireland, UK

    Tel +44 (0) 28 9097 3621
    r.harrison@qub.ac.uk

    Office:
    Fiona Gaffney
    +44 (0) 28 9097 5025
    f.gaffney@qub.ac.uk

    Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance:
    http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/13691066.asp

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
    [mailto:ENTREP@aomlists.pace.edu] On Behalf Of Charles H. Matthews,
    Ph.D.
    Sent: 31 October 2007 00:12
    To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"

    Alistair,

    This sounds like a very interesting paper. I would be interested in
    reading it. Thanks for sharing this on the listserve as it adds an
    interesting dimension to the discussion.

    Of course, now I have to ask, at what point do we cross the line from
    entrepreneurism to criminal activity? An entrepreneurial villain? It
    is interesting terminology, but it would seem to me you did your
    research on a group of gangsters not entrepreneurs. Or would you argue
    that they are entrepreneurs who have used their power for evil instead
    of good?

    Why is it we continue to muddy the waters by allowing the terms
    entrepreneur and entrepreneurial to be hijacked by every group that
    comes along including criminals? When one engages in illegal activity
    for financial gain why do we still want to call them entrepreneurial?
    There is a perfectly good word for what they are doing - criminal. Yet,
    entrepreneurial has become the adjective of choice.

    Which brings us full circle - was Al Capone a notorious criminal
    engaging in illegal commercial activities some under the guise of
    legitimate commerce (usually for the illegal purposes of money
    laundering) or an evil entrepreneur? A ruthless thug or an
    entrepreneurial villain? Both?

    Just curious...

    Chuck
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management
    Executive Director, UC Center for Entrepreneurship
    Education & Research
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221

    ---- Original message ----
    >Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:30:20 +0000
    >From: a.r.anderson@RGU.AC.UK
    >Subject: Re: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a social "evil"
    >To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    >
    > I had emailed Andrew privately but since there is so
    > much well deserved interest in the topic, I thought
    > that I should email the group.
    >
    > Rob Smith and I have a paper coming out in the next
    > edition of Entrepreneurship and Regional Development
    > which deals with the topic. We ask if there is a
    > moral space in entrepreneurship and argue that there
    > is, at least as far as entrepreneurship is a
    > socially constructed phenomenon. We spent some time
    > with a group of London gangsters collecting data for
    > this and were surprise to find that one notorious,
    > but very entrepreneurial villain considered himself
    > morally just!
    >
    >
    >
    > The moral space in entrepreneurship: An exploration
    > of ethical imperatives and the moral legitimacy of
    > being enterprising.
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair R Anderson and Rob Smith
    >
    >
    >
    > Abstract
    >
    >
    >
    > This paper explores the morality associated with
    > entrepreneurship. It has been argued that there is
    > no moral space in entrepreneurship, but such
    > instrumental views may the miss out much of the
    > nature of enterprise and how it is understood.
    > Consequently we propose that a socially constructed
    > perspective, based upon the meanings of
    > entrepreneurship, may help to understand the
    > morality of entrepreneurship. By applying such a
    > lens, we find that the narratives and discourses of
    > the meanings of entrepreneurship are ideological and
    > clearly present a moral space. This space lies
    > between the individual and society and is
    > normatively articulated in entrepreneurial
    > discourses. We develop a tentative framework which
    > links values and outcomes that shows how
    > "authenticated" entrepreneurship, that is to say
    > that which resonates with a socially approved moral
    > dimension, is legitimised by comparisons with a
    > socially constructed view. The empirical part of the
    > paper comprises of two case stories. The first is a
    > local garage owner who has a reputation as a decent
    > man; the second is a notorious, but entrepreneurial
    > London gangster. Our analysis shows that to be
    > judged "entrepreneurial", it is not enough to act
    > entrepreneurially; the social constructs of public
    > perceptions entail examining both moral means and
    > moral ends. We conclude that there is a moral
    > imperative in entrepreneurship.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Happy to send a word copy to anyone interested
    >
    >
    >
    > Alistair
    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------
    >
    > From: Entrepreneurship Division Listserv
    > [mailto:ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu] On Behalf Of
    > Henrik Berglund
    > Sent: 29 October 2007 22:59
    > To: ENTREP@AOMLISTS.pace.edu
    > Subject: [ENTREP] SV: [ENTREP] Entrepreneurship as a
    > social "evil"
    >
    >
    >
    > Since much of the discussion seems to center on
    > economics and functional views of entrepreneurship,
    > I think the following statement by Ludwig von Mises
    > might be of interest. In it, Mises writes of his
    > very general theory of human action. However, the
    > value-neutrality of the message is especially valid
    > in the case of entrepreneurial action:
    >
    >
    >
    > Ethical doctrines are intent upon establishing
    > scales of value according to which man should
    > act but does not necessarily always act. They
    > claim for themselves the vocation of telling
    > right from wrong and of advising man concerning
    > what he should aim at as the supreme good. They
    > are normative disciplines aiming at the
    > cognition of what ought to be. They are not
    > neutral with regard to facts; they judge them
    > from the point of view of freely adopted
    > standards.
    >
    >
    >
    > This is not the attitude of praxeology and
    > economics. They are fully aware of the fact that
    > the ultimate ends of human action are not open
    > to examination from any absolute standard.
    > Ultimate ends are ultimately given, they are
    > purely subjective, they differ with various
    > people and with the same people at various
    > moments in their lives. Praxeology and economics
    > deal with the means for the attainment of ends
    > chosen by the acting individuals. They do not
    > express any opinion with regard to such problems
    > as whether or not sybaritism is better than
    > asceticism. They apply to the means only one
    > yardstick, viz., whether or not they are
    > suitable to attain the ends at which the acting
    > individuals aim.
    >
    >
    >
    > The notions of abnormality and perversity
    > therefore have no place in economics. It does
    > not say that a man is perverse because he
    > prefers the disagreeable, the detrimental, and
    > the painful to the agreeable, the beneficial,
    > and the pleasant. It says only that he is
    > different from other people; that he likes what
    > others detest; that he considers useful what
    > others want to avoid; that he takes pleasure in
    > enduring pain which others avoid because it
    > hurts them.
    >
    > http://www.mises.org/story/2711
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Two questions arise: 1) Does 'evil' entrepreneurship
    > differ from 'good' entrepreneurship in its "means
    > for the attainment of ends"? 2) If not, should
    > entrepreneurship qua economic function be discussed
    > in ethical terms?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > /Henrik
    >
    >
    ________________________________________________________________________
    __
    >
    > Henrik Berglund
    >
    > Postdoctoral fellow
    >
    >
    >
    > Department of Technology Management and Economics
    >
    > Chalmers University of Technology
    >
    > Phone : +46 (0)708 128 138
    >
    > Email : henrik.berglund@chalmers.se
    >
    > Skype : henrik.k.berglund
    >
    > Web : www.henrikberglund.com
    >
    >
    >
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    > ************************************** This message
    > is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the
    > Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of
    > Management. Please do not post messages with
    > attached files. Commercial messages or spammed
    > messages are not allowed on the list. The use of
    > auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also
    > lead to your removal from the list. You can manage
    > your subscription options, including joining or
    > leaving the list here:
    > http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1
    > If you have questions or need help, please contact
    > Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu. Ventures HO!
    Charles H. Matthews, Ph.D.
    Professor of Entrepreneurship & Strategic Management
    Executive Director, U.C. Center for Entrepreneurship Education &
    Research
    Department of Management
    University of Cincinnati
    Cincinnati, OH 45221-0165
    Phone: 513-556-7123
    Fax: 513-556-5499
    Email: charles.matthews@uc.edu
    www.ucecenter.org

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship
    Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or
    spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder
    "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving
    the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch
    jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship
    Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or
    spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder
    "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving
    the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch
    jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!

    **************************************
    This message is from ENTREP which is sponsored by the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management.

    Please do not post messages with attached files. Commercial messages or spammed messages are not allowed on the list. The use of auto-responder "out-of-office" messages may also lead to your removal from the list.

    You can manage your subscription options, including joining or leaving the list here:
    http://aomlists.pace.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=entrep&A=1

    If you have questions or need help, please contact Dr. John Bunch jbunch@benedictine.edu.

    Ventures HO!