Abstract

The main contention of this paper is that our ability to embed a consideration of values into business school curricula is hampered by certain normative parameters that our students have when entering the classroom. If we don’t understand the processes of valuation that underpin our students’ reasoning, our ethics teaching will inevitably miss its mark. In this paper, we analyze one of the most prevalent metaphors that underpin moral arguments about business, and reveal the beliefs and assumptions that underpin it. By revisiting the content of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” metaphor, we show that the moral content of the metaphor has been significantly misconstrued through its subsequent reception in economic theory. The “Giving Voice to Values” pedagogy aims to enable students to act on their tacit values and address the rationalizations that they may encounter for not acting on these values. We believe our analysis can strengthen the employment of GVV in three ways: understanding tacit blockages to moral action, i.e., how students’ belief in the moral efficacy of the invisible hand could undermine their own sense of moral duty; addressing common rationalizations that may emerge from different assumptions about morally appropriate courses of action in the workplace; and resolving values conflicts on how to act.