Paper presented at "Business Ethics for the Knowledge Economy" conference in Hong Kong; written by Michael Smith

Business ethics in the knowledge economy

Globalization and motivation - beyond the bottom line

Any focus on the social responsibility of business has to be in the context of today's global realities. The questions I guess we all keep coming back to are these: Was September 11th 2001 the last horrific act of a single disaffected terrorist network, born out of inadequate family nurture and a psychotic hatred of America and all things Western? Or was it, God forbid, an opening shot, at the symbolic hearts of Western economic and military power, in a new global class war between the world's deprived and disaffected and the world's rich nations? Bin Laden and his cohorts were not from the ranks of the dispossessed. They came from wealthy or middle class backgrounds, which gave them the muscle to commit such a crime against humanity. They could not claim that they were 'depraved on account we are deprived', as one of the gang of Jets tells Officer Krupke in West Side Story. Indeed it would be outrageous to suggest that the deprived inevitably become the depraved. Human nature is, after all, long-suffering.

But one thing is clear: far too many in the world are deprived, economically and politically. A world in which vast swathes of the West have enormous amounts of disposable income while half the world's population lives on less than $2 a day, and 1.2 billion people on less than $1 a day, is simply unsustainable in the long term. The social commitment of business has to include this global reality if we are to avoid a new global class war of potentially horrendous proportions.

Till September 11th, globalization was the defining issue of the new millennium. It originated with the great explorers of the 15th to 18th centuries, who opened up the Spanish, Portuguese, British, French, Dutch and German colonial eras, carving up the spoils of Asia, Africa and the Americas. It was based on trade and profit. It included the triangular trade in human slaves and produce-the vast profits of which provided the capital to fuel the industrial revolution*1 (Martin, 1999). As the renowned Indian environmental campaigner Vandana Shiva comments: 'Globalization isn't new; we in the Third World are very familiar with it. We used to call it colonization.'*2 (Walljasper, 2001). But the great fear now is of economic colonization.

Today's second wave of globalization encompasses everything from multinational business, world trade and capital flows to information and communications technology; the Internet; the media and global electronic news-gathering; travel; environmental concerns; democracy and human rights; the sharing and interchange of cultures (and the fear of cultural domination, from burgers to the use of English), and the juxtaposition of religious communities and their values and experience. The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman writes that globalization has become 'a North Star and a world-wide shaping force'; 'the One Big Thing people should focus on'*3. Its overarching feature is integration*4 (Friedman, 1999).

Indeed it would be wrong to suggest that globalization is driven solely by corporate interests. Yet 'globalization' is still a misnomer. It is partial at best. Take, for instance, the world's market capitalization. Of the US$ 35 trillion in equities, as at February 2001, 90 per cent resided in Europe and the USA, whilst only a fraction of one per cent resided in the stock markets of the poorer nations. It is said that half the world's population, in the world's so-called knowledge economy, has never made a phone call, let alone used a computer or the Internet*5. 'For the poor the promise of the new information age can seem as remote as a distant star,' warns James Wolfensohn, President of the World Bank*6 (Smith, 2001). And while globalization continues to advance like a juggernaut, millions remain in abject poverty and the gap between the world's rich and poor grows ever wider. Kofi Annan, in his 2001 Nobel Peace Prize speech, saw this as 'a tale of two planets'.

It is also an affront to basic human dignity. The income gap between the bottom fifth of the population in the richest countries and the bottom fifth in the poorest countries grew from 30 to one in 1960 to 74 to one in 1995*7. Moreover, the disparities are within, as much as between, nations. 'This has the potential for creating great unrest,' says the Indian journalist and former senator Rajmohan Gandhi, a grandson of Mahatma Gandhi*8 (Gandhi, 2000). Such disparities, exacerbated by political oppression, fuel another form of globalization: that of the flight of refugees and economic migrants. So, the benefits of globalization, such as they are, have not yet gone nearly far enough in meeting the world's human needs. 'The violence that is possible,' Gandhi says, 'will not be avoided by the worship of money. But it may perhaps be avoided by a commitment to the needs of all, a commitment that has room for creativity and innovation.'*9

If we are to avoid a new global class war, what needs to happen? Above all, how do we help to increase the incomes, purchasing power and prospects of the world's poorest people? How do we give them the hope of a better future? And what is the role of business, a primary wealth creator, in its social responsibility towards the impoverished, in an era when over half the world's 100 leading economies are not nation states but corporations, and where 300 multinationals account for 25 per cent of the world's assets?*10 (Hertz, 2001). In other words, how do we create an economics of mutual concern and shared values-what some have termed an economics of unselfishness-rather than an economics of narrow self-interest? How do we create an economics of inclusion rather than social exclusion? And how wide do we define the notion of stake-holders? Can we, in the 21st century, create an 'ethical globalization', as Susan George puts it*11 (George: 2001); or 'an age of global co-operation, not corporate globalization', as David Morris of the Washington DC-based Institute for Local Self-Reliance calls for?*12 (Walljasper, 2001). In this 'new age of global interdependence,' says President Bill Clinton, 'the responsibility falls primarily upon the wealthy nations, to spread the benefits and shrink the burdens.'*13 (Clinton: 2001). But the question remains, will unfettered free enterprise, the capitalist system, free trade and open markets, capital flows and technology transfers, of themselves, ever fix the system in favour of the poor?

What, also, is the role of human motivation in the corridors of corporate power? For, as in politics, economic systems are only as good as the people who devise and run them. Adam Smith, who wrote The Wealth of Nations, also authored The Theory of Moral Sentiment, and it is now clear that the separation of these two texts has given us a distorted notion of how the capitalist system should work. 'Smith's two books are part of one vision,' says Stephen Young, Executive Director of the Caux Round Table group of American, European and Japanese business executives. 'The human person, he maintained, needs the dimension of right and wrong: you cannot be truly human without having a moral sense.'*14 (Young, 2001). So, our notions of shared moral values inevitably play a part, whether based on a solely utilitarian or pragmatic approach of mutual benefit, or from a principled or absolute morality based on, say, religious or ethical convictions, leading at their highest level to notions of self-sacrifice.

At the macro-economic level many structural changes are, of course, needed, from reform of Europe's Common Agricultural Policy and democratization of the World Trade Organization (WTO) towards a greater voice for the developing nations, to further debt remission, trade liberalization and access to global markets. It cannot be right, for instance, that India, despite its huge dairy production system, had to import 16,700 tonnes of milk and cream from The Netherlands, in the second half of 1999, simply because the imported price was substantially lower than the cost of India's smallholder production*15 (Pretty and Hine: 2001). And it is disturbing that the WTO, only eight years old, has too often bowed to Western, frequently American, corporate interests. When, for instance, the European Parliament voted 366 to 0 to ban synthetic hormones from beef, the US government, under pressure from agribusiness and other interest groups, complained to the WTO. The following year, WTO ruled in favour of the USA and the EU's appeal was rejected.*16 (Hertz: 2001)

But it would be wrong to suggest that such reforms alone, along with necessary legislation, are enough. For that would simply ignore the vital role that individual decision-making and human motivation play, both at the community and boardroom levels. Structures and human motivation affect behaviour, and it is my contention that we need to pay much more attention to the latter.

Social responsibility at the community level

At the micro-economic level there are many outstanding initiatives which encourage wealth creation, from international aid programmes and intermediate technology to the Graemeen Bank and Australia's Opportunity International. The latter, founded by David Bussau in Sydney in 1970, created over 150,000 jobs in 27 countries in 1997 alone, through micro-credit loans averaging no more than $400*17 (Smith: 2001). And in London, the annual Worldaware Awards honour outstanding private enterprise initiatives for sustainable development in Third World countries.

At this local, community level, there is nothing new in the notion of business having a social responsibility. In Saltaire, for instance, near the Yorkshire wool textile city of Bradford, the 19th Century mill owner Sir Titus Salt built one of the world's first model villages for his employees, providing housing, church, library and adult education. The Fry and Cadbury Quaker families in Birmingham had a similar philanthropic, if paternalistic, approach.

In India, Tata's, one of the nation's largest private sector conglomerates, is renowned for its social welfare programmes, including housing, hospitals, schools, rural development, and charitable trusts. Tata's was founded by Jamshetji Tata, after whom the steel city of Jamshedpur in Bihar is named. He regarded the health and welfare of his employees as 'the sure foundation of our prosperity'*18 (Lala: 1981). Yet today, with economic liberalization in India and increasing global competition, Tata's are having to cut back on their social welfare, and have made redundancies, in order to compete on costs and prices. Leaner and fitter can also, initially it seems, lead to this downside of globalization.

Tata's are by no means alone in India in their social commitment to the poor. Medium sized companies share the same involvement. Forbes Marshall, a Parsee family engineering company employing 700 people in Pune, runs a private hospital for its employees and nearby villages, and provides staff and funds for local village development projects. In 1999, Forbes Marshall was second only to Tata Steel, out of 85 companies nation-wide, in a 'social awareness' award given by India's Business World magazine and sponsored by Compaq computers19 (Smith, 2001).

This commitment to social responsibility continues throughout the West, too, where we have our own 'Third Worlds' of inner city deprivation within our major urban areas. In Britain, Business in the Community involves 700 firms, including 75 of the FTSE 100 companies, in aiming to tackle such issues. Another initiative is that involving printing company director Richard Hawthorne, in Nottingham. The city is Britain's fifth most prosperous, but unemployment among the ethnic minorities in inner-city areas runs at 25 per cent. Hawthorne chairs a private inner-city Partnership Council which The Guardian newspaper described as 'a radical Nottingham project to involve local people' in urban renewal'*20. It engages the local community of four neighbourhoods in what Hawthorne terms 'honest conversation' about what needs to be done to improve facilities and give training in skills for the unemployed. Hawthornes Printers was among the companies cited by Britain's Institute of Public Policy Research as good examples of 'corporate social engagement'*21 (Smith, 2001).

Throughout the business world we have, then, this notion of corporate social responsibility. And examples of social responsibility form the fabric of a society based not just on the bottom line, important as that is-for no one is arguing against profit, which makes a social commitment possible-but on extending 'beyond the bottom line'. Increasingly, enlightened companies are auditing their 'triple bottom line': their financial, social and environmental performances.

As Sir John Egan and Des Wilson argue in their new book Private Business, Public Battleground, The Case for 21st Century Stakeholder Companies, 'If business is to be free to grow and prosper, it can no longer act in isolation from the world around it. Like it or not, it is now answerable to greater expectations than just the bottom line. Fortunately the new generation of business leaders understands this. There's a quiet revolution happening, a revolution in the way business perceives itself-no longer as a law unto itself, but accountable to the community and its highest values.'*22

Social responsibility at the global level

Something further is needed in defining social responsibility in a globalized world: a commitment in the world's boardrooms to issues of justice as much as to shareholder value. A much broader definition of stakeholders is needed, to include not only employees, shareholders, suppliers, customers and community, but also nationhood and the global community. This can be called 'globalizing responsibility'. It involves such issues as accountability and transparency (as the dramatic collapse of Marconi and Enron have demonstrated), good governance, healthcare, the environment, human rights (and duties), racial justice, and the war against corruption. Bill Jordan, the outgoing Secretary General of the ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trades Unions) includes, under human rights, the need for freedom of association, collective bargaining and fair wages. 'Whatever ideology or direction the world chooses to take, it must not lose its values, its standards,' he told an international business conference in Caux, Switzerland in 1997. 'Not even the colossal forces of globalization are a match for the collective power of individuals to defend social values and justice.'*23

The best boardrooms recognise their responsibility for the consequences of their decisions. President Bill Clinton urged the world's business leaders gathered at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in 2000: 'My most important wish is that the global business community could adopt a shared vision for the next 10 to 20 years about what you want the world to look like, and then go about trying to create it. collectively you can change the world.'*24 (Hertz, 2001).This was hardly intended as a mandate for economic hegemony, but rather a call to a more just world economic condition. A few outstanding business leaders have led the field in articulating their vision for the global community.

Ryuzaburo Kaku, the late Chairman and Chief Executive of the Japanese cameras-to-copiers multinational Canon, was one of the most far sighted of industrialists. Business, he urged, needs 'a guiding philosophy for the 21st century'. He was a founder member of the Swiss-based Caux Round Table (CRT) group of business executives, whose Principles for Business outlines business responsibility to a range of stakeholders and has become a standard work*25. Kaku advocated kyosei-literally symbiosis-which he interpreted as 'living and working together for the common good of mankind'. Companies, he said, which have a sense of global responsibility aim to tackle 'global imbalances'-in trade relations and job opportunities, the gap between rich and poor, and in 'the quality of the environment which today's generation leaves for the next'; 'Of all the great problems which confront the global community today, perhaps the greatest is that of imbalance between the generations: between those of us who live on the earth today and those who will inhabit it in the future.' His kyosei philosophy was most manifest in Canon's environmental practices, and today the company has a special department, employing 300 people, exclusively concerned with minimising damage to the ecosystem in all company activities, from manufacturing to disposal.*26 (Smith, 2001).

Few issues impoverish people more than corruption. It leads to the misallocation of public funds and resources, undermines investor confidence and creates a massive disincentive to investment. By 1999, the world's foreign direct investment between nations totalled US$884 billion (World Bank's Development Indicators). Of this, over half, or $484 billion, landed in the United States and the European Union countries. Britain received 9 to 10 per cent, second only to the USA. But low income countries received less than $10 billion, or 1.1 per cent, in investment and the 50 poorest countries received less than half of one per cent. 'Clearly the United States and European multinational corporations were very cautious when making capital commitments in the emerging economies of the developing nations,' comments the Caux Round Table.*27 Corruption is one reason for this caution. Corruption is exacerbated by bad governance. One British cabinet minister estimates that as much as 40 per cent of the GDP of sub-Saharan Africa is invested in the West rather than at home. But corruption is also too often fuelled by Western businesses competing for contracts. The Berlin-based NGO Transparency International has led the war against grand-scale corruption and was a decisive influence on the OECD in drawing up its anti-bribery convention. Peter Eigen, the founder and driving force of TI, was so incensed by the levels of business corruption in East Africa, when he was a World Bank official there, that he resigned his post to found TI in 1993. 'Corruption undermines good governance, distorts public policy, leads to misallocation of resources and harms the private sector,' Eigen says. 'But, above all, it hurts those who can least afford it.'*28

In October 2001, 1,400 people from 143 nations, including business leaders and heads of state, attended the 10th International Anti-Corruption Conference in Prague, organised by TI and sponsored by the United Nations Development Program.*29 There were telling examples of initiatives which have made an impact on corrupt practices, including from business leaders who have taken courageous stands against corruption. Ricardo Semler, Chief Executive of the $200 million Brazilian public services company Semco, said that his company was about a third of the size it might have been 'had we accepted to play along with the [corrupt] rules of the game'. Instead Semco had acted as 'whistleblowers', and this had led to several arrests. Once, government environment inspectors wanted paying off when they found that the company's paint tanks were located in the wrong place. Semler refused. They told him: 'You have a two-and-a-half year old son. Are you sure you want to do this?' Despite the threat, Semler decided to fight the criminal indictment they were threatening him with. But in this case he also decided not to expose the individuals threatening him. 'I felt I could not take the risk in dealing with four or five people known to be extremely violent and who were telling us that they knew exactly where we walked every day, how my kid walked to school.'*30

The Mumbai (Bombay) businessman Suresh Vazirani, founder and chairman of Transasia Biomedical which manufactures medical diagnostic equipment, has also taken an anti-corruption stance. He allowed vital imported components to stay in a dockside warehouse for three months, rather than pay an exorbitant bribe to a customs official. In so doing, he risked missing an export deadline to Germany, which would eventually result in a DM 2 million contract. For him, integrity and reputation came before expediency. Indeed, Vazirani employs two lawyers full time to fight the court cases that arise from his refusal to give bribes. He has also made his medical equipment, which tests for blood diseases, available in 34 districts of Mumbai, including to shanty hut dwellers who could not otherwise afford such treatment.*31

Inner motivation

Such decision-making takes a great deal of moral courage, born out of an inner motivation. What are the wellsprings of this inner motivation? They can come from a profound psychological experience. Kaku's emphasis on environmental concerns at the Canon corporation was born out of his traumatic experience in Nagasaki, where he was a 19-year-old conscripted shipyard worker when the atom bomb fell. They can also come from a sense of moral outrage from a secular viewpoint. An absolute or altruistic conviction is not necessarily based on a religious belief, though if outrage involves hatred of the perpetrators then we descend into class antagonism. Inner motivation can also spring from a deep personal spiritual or religious experience or conviction.

Richard Hawthorne in Nottingham tells how a travelling theatre group from India, which visited London in 1967, made a profound impact on his life. One particular song, Will we have rice tomorrow, Dad?, made a deep impression on him. Sitting in his car on the Thames Embankment the next day, he felt an inner call to 'open my heart to people whom I had kept at arms length and to newcomers to Britain who were treated as second class citizens'. A Christian, Hawthorne felt he was being urged to 'the biggest task that God was asking of me and not to restrict myself to things I felt I could undertake without making a fool of myself.'*32 This inner experience affected the direction of his life's work. Hawthorne is a participant in Caux Initiatives for Business (CIB), a new global initiative similar to the Caux Round Table. CIB, launched in Washington DC in January 2002, has grown out of the annual Caux Conference for Business and Industry, held for the past 28 years in the Swiss Alpine village of Caux, near Montreux. CIB seeks, as its mission, 'to strengthen the motivation of care and moral commitment in economic life and thinking, in order to create wealth and jobs, correct economic and environmental imbalances and tackle the root causes of poverty.'*33 (www.cauxinitiativesforbusiness.org)

One of the more unusual stories of the motivation of care and moral commitment to emerge from Caux is that of David Erdal, the erstwhile Chairman of Tullis Russell paper making company in Fife, Scotland. Born into privilege, Erdal studied Chinese at Oxford. But from a young age he had been deeply disturbed by the disparities between rich and poor in his home area. He became an ardent Marxist and a member of the Workers Revolutionary Party. He taught for several months in Chairman Mao's China but the climate of fear and mistrust disillusioned him, and he returned to Scotland at the age of 29 to join the family business. He worked his way through the major departments, becoming Chairman of the company in 1985. He now believes that a competitive free market is the best system for allocating goods and services. 'It is completely honest,' he says. 'You buy the best products and services at the lowest price and there is no hypocrisy in it.' But he also lost nothing of his sense of social justice, in the face of poverty, which had earlier driven him to Marxism. An unjust system of ownership, he argues, leaves wealth in the hands of those who already have it, and non-share-owning employees remain in a subservient relationship. He turned his family business into an employee share ownership company, and now runs Job Ownership, a company which advises companies throughout Central Europe on employee ownership*34.

Motivation, say the psychologists, is concerned with exploring what underlies our actions. Motive comes from the Latin word movere, meaning to move, and denotes that which energizes and gives direction to people's behaviour. The psychologist G A Miller said: 'The study of motivation is the study of all those pushes and prods-biological, social and psychological-that defeat our laziness and move us, either eagerly or reluctantly, to action.'*35 (Miller, 1962; Gross, 2001). I would also add to those 'pushes and prods' the words 'ethical' and 'spiritual'. In other words, motivation results not just from personal need but also from altruism and an informed conscience-about the state of the world, the state of people in it, and the state of ourselves. This begs the question: how is conscience informed? I would answer: by information and knowledge, an awareness of the true state of things, by listening to others, by empathy and 'emotional intelligence at work', by turning the searchlight inwards on ourselves and by silent reflection. The methodology of Caux Initiatives for Business is to encourage all these practices, through 'honest conversation'; through group discussion; and through individual reflection, inspiration and insight. The model, says CIB director Steven Greisdorf, is to 'listen, reflect, discuss and engage'-with others, with the issues and with wider society.

The Finnish businessman Paul Gundersen, for many years an executive in the Nokia group and a CIB participant, comments: 'Without an inner motivation, which stretches beyond group interest, it will become impossible to solve our most urgent problems, such as ethnic conflict, environmental problems, mounting unemployment. The most important decisions of our business lives are the choices we make about our personal values.'*36 (Gundersen, 1995) A key phrase here from Gundersen is 'beyond group interest', as this requires long term perspective, not short term gain, if business is to do what is right rather than what is expedient in a competitive climate. Ethically conscious share holders, and even pension fund managers, can recognise this, not to mention consumers and graduate employees who increasingly demand to work for companies with the best ethical reputations. No-one feels confident working for a company that has a poor reputation or public image.

Multinationals also have 'to meet the test of consumer approval. They have to meet standards of accountability and regulation,' says EU Commissioner Chris Patten, the former Governor of Hong Kong. He emphasized 'the centrality of man in the sweep of history', in a talk he gave on the challenges and opportunities of globalization to London's Royal Geographical Society, January 31st, 2002. 'Technology,' he said, 'can empower the individual so that we can recognise that we can each make a difference.' There were the concepts of 'original sin and original virtue' and 'we have to be more effective in our humanitarian responses to evil'.

Such ethical thinking and initiatives, beyond the bottom line, by people in business are beginning to deliver results. This trend needs to be noted, encouraged and multiplied. With the clout that corporations, and business interests, have in political policy making, we need to look increasingly to business for the ideas and actions towards a more just global economic condition, particularly as business is where power is concentrated. As Egan and Wilson comment: 'In the 21st century business revolution-the stakeholder/corporate citizenship/corporate social responsibility movement and its increasing adoption by business-lies a real chance for a better world.' In this context, motivations based on personal integrity, as demonstrated by Kaku, Semler, Hawthorne, Vazirani, Erdal, Gundersen and countless others, can make a great deal of difference to the world's disparities. The future of civilization depends on the decisions made by individuals in company boardrooms as much as in the corridors of political power.

Footnotes

*1. Martin, Steve I, 1999: Britain's Slave Trade: 1999, London, Pan Macmillan; and Phillips, Trevor: 1999, Britain's Slave Trade, Channel 4 TV series.
*2. Quoted by Jay Walljasper, Utne Reader, Lens Publishing, Minneapolis, Nov-Dec 2001, p.66, from his book Visionaries: People and Ideas to Change Your Life, Utne Reader Books/New Society Publishers, Minneapolis, 2001.
*3. Friedman, Thomas, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Harper Collins Publishers, London, 1999, p. XXI.
*4. Friedman, ibid, p. XXI.
*5. Quoted by Michael Smith in 'Bridging the digital and poverty divides', Beyond the Bottom Line, (2nd edition) The Industrial Pioneer, Birmingham, 2001, p. 49, and at www.beyond-the-bottom-line.co.uk
*6. Ibid, p. 49.
*7. UN Human Development Report, 1999, quoted by Rajmohan Gandhi, 'Globalizing the hearts of East and West', For A Change, Vol 13 No 5, 2000, London, p. 15, and at www.forachange.co.uk
*8. Ibid, For A Change, p. 15. Also quoted by Smith (ibid) p. 49.
*9. Ibid, For A Change and Smith (ibid).
*10. Hertz, Noreena, The Silent Takeover, Random House Business Books, London, 2001; and Sillanpa, Maria, and Wheeler, David, The Stakeholder Corporation, Pitman Books, London, 1998.
*11. George, Susan, Associate Director of the Transnational Institute, Amsterdam, in a speech to the International Conference
on Globalization, 30 October 2001.
*12. Walljasper, ibid.
*13. President Bill Clinton's Dimbleby Lecture, 'The Struggle for the Soul of the 21st Century', 17/12/2001.
*14. Young, Steven, from a keynote speech given to the opening session of the 2001 Caux Conference for Business and Industry, Caux, Switzerland, 14 July 2001.
*15. Pretty, Dr Jules, and Hine, Rachel, 'The World Food Context', SAFE World Research Project, 2001 (2.16): Centre for Environment and Society, University of Essex.
*16. Hertz, ibid.
*17. Smith, Michael, ibid, p. 60.
*18. Lala, RM, The Creation of Wealth, India Book House, Bombay, 1981.
*19. See For A Change magazine, London, Vol 13 No 3, June/July 2000, p2. Also Smith, 'Brain drain in reverse', (ibid) p. 43.
*20. Smith, 'Hope in the inner city' (ibid) p. 35.
*21. Smith, (ibid), p. 38.
*22. Published by Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, 2002. Quoted from their article, 'Does big business always have to be bad business?', The Business, London, 3-4 March 2002.
*23. Jordan, Bill, 'The morality of globalization', Caux, Switzerland, 1977, quoted by Smith, (ibid), p. 10.
*24. Hertz, Noreena, The Silent Takeover, Random House Business Books, London, 2001.
*25. Principles for Business, 1994, Caux Round Table, Secretariat: Amaliastraat 10, 2414 The Hague.
*26. Smith, Michael, 'Canon law for the new millennium', (ibid), p. 11.
*27. Caux Round Table, July 2001, 'The greatest challenge for the world business community-making it possible for the poor nations to share in global prosperity', p. 5.
*28. Smith, Michael, 'Outlawing a world of bribery', (ibid), p. 53. See also Sunday Business, London, 7 February 1999.
*29. Reported by Michael Smith, For A Change magazine, London, Vol 14 No 6, December 2001, p. 18.
*30. Reported by Michael Smith, For A Change magazine, London, Vol 14 No 6, December 2001, p. 19. See also Semler, Ricardo, Maverik!, Random House Business Books, London, 2001.
*31. For A Change magazine, London: Vol 13 No 3, June/July 2000, p2; Vol 15 No 2, April/May 2002, p. 2.
*32. 'Game plan', The Guardian, Society Section, 17 January 2001; also Smith, ibid, p. 35.
*33. Caux Initiatives for Business, 1156 Fifteenth Street, NW, Suite 910, Washington DC 20005-1704. www.cauxinitiativesforbusiness.org
*34. The Herald, Glasgow, 17 April 1995; see also Smith, 'Fair shares for all', ibid, p. 21; and Maurine Cleave, The Telegraph Magazine, 4 October 1997.
*35. Gross, Richard, 'Motivation', Psychology-the Science of Mind and Behaviour, 2001, Hodder & Stoughton, London, p. 118.
*36. Gundersen, Paul, 'Assignment from Calcutta', Incorrigibly Independent-a Finnish life, Caux Edition, Switzerland, p. 152.

References

Caux Round Table: 2001, 'The greatest challenge for the world business community-making it possible for the poor nations to share in global prosperity', p. 5 (CauxRT@aol.com).
Clinton, Bill: 2001, 'The Struggle for the Soul of the 21st Century',
Richard Dimbleby Lecture, BBC, London, 17 December 2001.
Egan, John and Wilson, Des: 2002, Private Business Public Battleground, (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave).
Friedman, Thomas: 1999, 'Opening scene: the world is ten years old', The Lexus and the Olive Tree, (London: Harper Collins Publishers), p. xxi.
Gandhi, Rajmohan: 2000, 'Globalizing the hearts of East and West', For A Change, Vol 13 No 5, London.
George, Susan: 2001, 'Clusters of crisis and a planetary contract', International Conference on Globalization, 30 October 2001.
Gross, Richard: 2001, 'Motivation', Psychology-the Science of Mind and Behaviour, fourth edition (London: Hodder & Stoughton), p. 118.
Gundersen, Paul: 1995, 'Assignment from Calcutta', Incorrigibly Independent-a Finnish life (Caux, Switzerland: Caux Edition), p. 152.
Hertz, Noreena: 2001, The Silent Takeover, (London: Random House Business Books), pp. 33, 34, 173.
Jordan, Bill: 1997, The Morality of Globalization, speech given to the Caux Conference for Business and Industry, Caux, Switzerland, July 1997.
Lala, R. M.: 1981, The Creation of Wealth (Bombay: India Book House).
Martin, Steve I, 1999: Britain's Slave Trade (London: Pan Macmillan.)
Miller, G.A.: 1962 , Psychology: the Science of Mental Life (Harmondsworth: Peguin).
Semler, Ricardo: 2001, Maverik! (London: Random House Business Books).
Sillanpa, Maria and Wheeler, David: 1998, The Stakeholder Corporation (London: Pitman).
Smith, Michael: 2001, Beyond the Bottom Line-Towards a Social and Ethical Commitment for Business, (Birmingham, UK: The Industrial Pioneer).
Walljaspar, Jay: 2001, Visionaries: People and Ideas to Change Your Life (Minneapolis: Utne Reader Books/New Society Publishers).
Young, Steven: 2001, keynote speech given to the opening session of the 2001Caux Conference for Business and Industry, Caux, Switzerland, 14 July 2001