The Business of the World
I’ve been thinking about business. I suppose that’s only natural for me, but I’ve been particularly troubled by a chapter in a book I’ve been reading. The book is about eight Latter-day Saints who have become big successes in their business enterprises and it focuses on how their religious beliefs help them in their careers.
By the way, thanks for the book, Jake.
The chapter is called “Hardball is Good” and it’s about how a competitive nature helps these business leaders succeed. The author mentions that this competitiveness is contrary to many Christian teachings, but claims that it is appropriate in the business world, if not in personal life. He says that it has to do with always excelling – doing things the best way possible. In business that means doing them better than anyone else. The book is called The Mormon Way of Doing Business. What I’m interested in is the saintly way of doing business.
So I’m wondering what you all think about this. Here are my thoughts:
My mind is drawn to two examples: the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (or Ammonites) and Captain Moroni. The Ammonites refused to shed human blood even in defense of their own lives or the lives of their families. Moroni fought at all times to preserve the lives and liberty of his people.
The reason I take war as an analogy for business is that it speaks to the competitive factor that is at stake here. We’re talking about a world in which the elemental beings (companies) are in many if not most cases out to destroy the others that get in their way. If this is the wrong paradigm, please correct me; it’s part of what troubles me.
Back to my examples. The Ammonites would not destroy their brethren because of the most important Christian virtue: love. They loved their enemies so much that they would not kill them even at the cost of their own lives. Moroni deliberately took the lives of his enemies for exactly the same reason. He loved his people too much to let them be destroyed. Which is the right way?
Hmmm....
I think the Ammonites may be a special case. They, as you know, were once just as bloodthirsty as their enemies, but after their conversion they buried their weapons of war as a protection against falling into their former ways. They would not shed blood out of love for others, but also because they were afraid their former murders would return to them. You remember that they placed no such obligation on the next generation. Their sons, in righteousness, did “administer death unto all those who opposed them (Alma 57:19)” in war. Presumably, most business people have not acted so badly that they must now allow their competitors to overrun them for the salvation of their own souls.
On the other hand, Moroni was the quintessential warrior. He took extra steps to be better at warfare than his enemies. He developed better armor, better fortifications, and better tactics. The scriptures do not say so, but he may well have tried to improve his weaponry, too. He was engaged in the same activities as his enemies (i.e. whatever was necessary to conducting warfare) and with the same destructive tools, but he did it from a higher moral ground. How?
First, Moroni never delighted in the shedding of blood. He always looked upon it as a measure only to be taken against those who were determined to destroy those he loved. Secondly, His motives were pure. He and his men were “inspired by a better cause.(Alma 43:45)” He fought to preserve what was good, not for power, money, or glory. Indeed, those who did fight for that trinity of corrupting influences were Moroni’s perpetual foes, a fact he constantly pointed out to them.
Back to business. I’ve always been disgusted with the way everything is driven by money. Although I recognize the necessity of subsisting within such a system, I cannot help wanting to change it. Perhaps that is why I told myself that when I went into business, it would not be for money alone. I would have to turn a profit, I would have to do the best I could financially, but that could not be my primary motivating factor. Like the Nephites, I needed a better cause. Does my business contribute to the world, and not just the economy? Do my activities help satisfy a real, rather than a perceived or falsely created need? Am I creating positive change, or just filling my pockets with it? To me, this is what separates the good from the bad in business. A lot of companies exist just to make money by selling something that, as Dr. Seuss put it, "nobody wants, because nobody needs. (from Dr. Seuss' Sleep Book)" The strategic sales talk about "creating a need" makes me sick. There must be a way to have a successful business model that does not prey on either customers or competitors.
To his and their credits, the author of this book points out that these business leaders are not motivated by money or power either. But the idea of actively working against a competitor is a hard one to swallow from the “turn the other cheek” mentality that I grew up with. One of the author’s main points in this chapter is that a successful business person can separate personal and business morality enough to know when destroying a competitor becomes a good thing.
Is that the saintly way of doing business? What do you think?
By the way, thanks for the book, Jake.
The chapter is called “Hardball is Good” and it’s about how a competitive nature helps these business leaders succeed. The author mentions that this competitiveness is contrary to many Christian teachings, but claims that it is appropriate in the business world, if not in personal life. He says that it has to do with always excelling – doing things the best way possible. In business that means doing them better than anyone else. The book is called The Mormon Way of Doing Business. What I’m interested in is the saintly way of doing business.
So I’m wondering what you all think about this. Here are my thoughts:
My mind is drawn to two examples: the Anti-Nephi-Lehies (or Ammonites) and Captain Moroni. The Ammonites refused to shed human blood even in defense of their own lives or the lives of their families. Moroni fought at all times to preserve the lives and liberty of his people.
The reason I take war as an analogy for business is that it speaks to the competitive factor that is at stake here. We’re talking about a world in which the elemental beings (companies) are in many if not most cases out to destroy the others that get in their way. If this is the wrong paradigm, please correct me; it’s part of what troubles me.
Back to my examples. The Ammonites would not destroy their brethren because of the most important Christian virtue: love. They loved their enemies so much that they would not kill them even at the cost of their own lives. Moroni deliberately took the lives of his enemies for exactly the same reason. He loved his people too much to let them be destroyed. Which is the right way?
Hmmm....
I think the Ammonites may be a special case. They, as you know, were once just as bloodthirsty as their enemies, but after their conversion they buried their weapons of war as a protection against falling into their former ways. They would not shed blood out of love for others, but also because they were afraid their former murders would return to them. You remember that they placed no such obligation on the next generation. Their sons, in righteousness, did “administer death unto all those who opposed them (Alma 57:19)” in war. Presumably, most business people have not acted so badly that they must now allow their competitors to overrun them for the salvation of their own souls.
On the other hand, Moroni was the quintessential warrior. He took extra steps to be better at warfare than his enemies. He developed better armor, better fortifications, and better tactics. The scriptures do not say so, but he may well have tried to improve his weaponry, too. He was engaged in the same activities as his enemies (i.e. whatever was necessary to conducting warfare) and with the same destructive tools, but he did it from a higher moral ground. How?
First, Moroni never delighted in the shedding of blood. He always looked upon it as a measure only to be taken against those who were determined to destroy those he loved. Secondly, His motives were pure. He and his men were “inspired by a better cause.(Alma 43:45)” He fought to preserve what was good, not for power, money, or glory. Indeed, those who did fight for that trinity of corrupting influences were Moroni’s perpetual foes, a fact he constantly pointed out to them.
Back to business. I’ve always been disgusted with the way everything is driven by money. Although I recognize the necessity of subsisting within such a system, I cannot help wanting to change it. Perhaps that is why I told myself that when I went into business, it would not be for money alone. I would have to turn a profit, I would have to do the best I could financially, but that could not be my primary motivating factor. Like the Nephites, I needed a better cause. Does my business contribute to the world, and not just the economy? Do my activities help satisfy a real, rather than a perceived or falsely created need? Am I creating positive change, or just filling my pockets with it? To me, this is what separates the good from the bad in business. A lot of companies exist just to make money by selling something that, as Dr. Seuss put it, "nobody wants, because nobody needs. (from Dr. Seuss' Sleep Book)" The strategic sales talk about "creating a need" makes me sick. There must be a way to have a successful business model that does not prey on either customers or competitors.
To his and their credits, the author of this book points out that these business leaders are not motivated by money or power either. But the idea of actively working against a competitor is a hard one to swallow from the “turn the other cheek” mentality that I grew up with. One of the author’s main points in this chapter is that a successful business person can separate personal and business morality enough to know when destroying a competitor becomes a good thing.
Is that the saintly way of doing business? What do you think?
Comments