جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « اخلاق مدیریت » در نشریات گروه « علوم قرآن و حدیث »

Supporting and empowering middle managers is a fundamental aspect of management that significantly impacts organizational success. The significance and influence of this support extend beyond its provision to include the manner and scope of assistance. Through a study of the Holy Quran and a careful examination of the support provided by God to His prophets, the author has identified and compiled essential ethical principles. This research adopts an analytical approach to derive the importance and effects of supporting middle managers by referencing the Holy Quran, Islamic narrations, and the perspectives of Quranic interpreters. The Quranic model of supporting prophets, which involves continuous supervision to prevent deviations and providing assistance in various ways and situations, is evident in the interaction between God and His prophets. Implementing this Quranic model will be highly beneficial and effective in motivating and bolstering the morale of middle managers, enhancing their sense of responsibility, and aiding them in fulfilling their missions accurately while avoiding negligence, indolence, and deviations.

The “social responsibility of organizations” figures prominently in many sources of management and organization ethics, and for many, this might solve behavioral and structural problems of organizations, as it might enhance its accountability to people’s complaints and higher supervisions. There is no consensus, however, over the efficiency and advantages of this concept. The most adamant opponent of the notion is Milton Friedman—a highly influential contemporary economist. This paper is devoted to an account and critique of Friedman’s view of the “social responsibility of organizations.” In order to have a more precise understanding of Friedman’s view, I deploy the descriptive method and draw on his interview with New York Times to account for his views, and then I begin my criticism by deploying the exegetical-critical method with a functionalist, rather than a foundationalist, approach. I conclude that, regardless of objections to Friedman’s liberalist foundations and critiques of certain motivations, confusions, and biases, it might be pointed out that his emphasis on elimination of external authoritative supervisions is understandable and acceptable to some extent, but his insistence on total elimination of such supervisions on the expectation of self-supervision or internal super-vision is not realistic.

Today, organizational requirements have inevitable effects on our individual and social life and behavior, and thereby, they will serve as grounds for many of our free actions and acquired characteristics. In such a situation, it is very likely that moral responsibility for such actions and characteristics is to a large extent on the shoulders of organizations and social institutes, rather than individuals and groups. Organizations and social institutes are morally responsible in virtue of their legal personality, and the obligation of pursuing and ensuring the fulfilment of the requirements of such responsibility is on these organizations and institutes. Thus, the notion of “management ethics” comes to be formed—a notion I revisit in this paper first with a descriptive-analytic method and a new viewpoint, and I will then reply to objections that might be levelled at the necessity of an ethics for management given practical features of moral problems of management, and then I consider and analyze various versions of the necessity of morality for managers in the literature of applied ethics in this area by adopting an Islamic approach. As a result of this analysis, I have sought to modify functionalist and purely utilitarian ideas to arrive at an authentic unqualified view of the necessity of an ethics for management.