managment

Article

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations Foundations José R. de la Torre 1 , Corinne B. Young 2

1 University of Bologna Business School, Italy, and Florida International University (Emeritus), USA, 2 Franklin University Switzerland, Switzerland

Keywords: global skills and values, global competency, sustainability, global citizenship

AIB Insights Vol. 20, Issue 1, 2020

Whereas national sovereignty persists as the primary form of political organization, the interconnectedness of today’s world implies that any citizen’s rights and obligations are no longer confined within national boundaries while many societal issues require global civic responses. Thus, business leaders need to be educated on the skills and values that characterize global citizenship in order for them to be accountable and act accordingly. This article traces the historical foundations of the concept of global citizenship, its definition and legitimacy. We also list the major skills and values that global citizens must possess in order to act accordingly.

INTRODUCTION 1

The rights, duties, and obligations of a citizen of any sov- ereign state are still fundamental to civil society. Nonethe- less, the interconnectedness of today’s world requires us to recognize that these rights and obligations may no longer be confined within national boundaries and that many glob- al issues require global civic responses. Global citizenship, however, cannot be simply defined as an extension of the national concept to a global sphere. As Michael Byers (2005) writes, “Global citizenship empowers individual human be- ings to participate in decisions concerning their lives, in- cluding the political, economic, social, cultural and envi- ronmental conditions in which they live. It includes the right to vote, to express opinions and associate with others, and to enjoy a decent and dignified quality of life. It is ex- pressed through engagement in the various communities of which the individual is a part, at the local, national and global level. And it includes the right to challenge authority and existing power structures – to think, argue and act – with the intent of changing the world.”

Nigel Dower (2005) encourages skeptics to at least ac- knowledge the individual’s responsibility to making this world a better place by ensuring its continued existence. To the extent that certain issues transcend boundaries – both morally and physically – only responsible global citi- zens can ensure the sustainability of the earth and its in- habitants. How then should global citizenship be defined? Where from does it derive its legitimacy? What does it mean for business leaders? How can it be taught and promoted? This essay will try to answer the first two questions; a com- panion piece, also included in this issue of AIB Insights, at- tempts to answer the last two.

GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP THROUGHOUT HISTORY2

The idea of individuals identifying with fellow human be- ings near and far has been with us for at least two millennia. The first recorded mention of a “citizen of the world” dates to classical Greece and the life of Diogenes (412-323 BCE). A self-appointed critic of Greek society, he taught that wis- dom and happiness were inherent qualities independent of societal norms, and rejected family, political and social or- ganizations, as well as property rights and reputation, as re- gressive characteristics of Athenian life. Diogenes is cred- ited with the first use of the word “cosmopolitan”; when asked where he came from, he replied “I am a citizen of the world” (from kosmo – universe – and politês –citizen).

The Stoics, who flourished in Athens during the Hellenis- tic period, believed that goodness lies in the state of the soul itself, in wisdom and self-control. Accordingly, each in- dividual “dwells … in two communities – the local commu- nity of our birth, and the community of human argument and aspiration” (Nussbaum, 1997). To understand this view of cosmopolitanism one needs only to examine Hierocles’ set of concentric circles that define a person’s identity: the first circle is drawn around oneself, next comes our immedi- ate family, then our extended family, followed by the neigh- borhood, fellow citizens and, at last, all humanity (Figure 1). The task of the world citizen is to “draw the circles in towards the center, making all human beings more like our fellow city dwellers” (Nussbaum, 1997), deserving our con- cern.

Early Christians were strongly influenced by these ideals. The division between the near citizens (belonging to the polis) and those distant (the cosmopolis) is made starker by the belief that whereas local government may have im- plicit divine authority, the most important work for human goodness is removed from any political sphere. Thus, the call to “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” (Mathew, 22:21) lends

Some of these ideas were first presented at the Annual AIB Conference in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2010.

This compact narrative is based on information derived from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Great Books of the Western World, and Wikipedia.

1

2

de la Torre, J. R., & Young, C. B. 2020. Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations. AIB InsightsAIB Insights, 20(1).

Figure 1: Circles of Identity and Feelings of Obligation Figure 1: Circles of Identity and Feelings of Obligation

strength to the concept of a community where all nations can become saintly and deserving of similar rights regard- less of their proximity.

Similarly, a major tenet of Hinduism is the concept of ahimsa, a Sanskrit word that defines non-violence, both to animals and humans. This is particularly strong in Jainism, dating to the 6th century BCE, and is incorporated into the representation of an open palm with a wheel at its center. The wheel is the dharmacakra, a resolve to halt the inex- orable cycle of reincarnation to which we are all condemned through a relentless pursuit of truth and non-violence. Bud- dhist philosophy emphasizes the cause and effect relation- ships implied by karma. Here again, one’s goal is to end the recycle of birth and suffering through good deeds so we can reach Nirvana. In both cases, the obligation towards one’s fellow humans is an integral element of maintain- ing harmony. Sikhism, a variant of Hindu philosophy and perhaps the only monotheistic religion in the ancient East, proclaimed that all humans are equal under God, and our right to life is constrained only by the obligation to care for others and share one’s material possessions.

During the Middle Ages, scholars such as Erasmus of Rot- terdam drew on cosmopolitan philosophy to advocate the ideals of world peace and universal rights. Arguing that hu- mans are by nature sociable and prone to live in harmony with one another, Erasmus pleaded for national and re-

ligious tolerance, and regarded all like-minded people as his fellow world citizens (Erasmus, 1986). Grotius, Hobbes, Pufendorf and others drew on natural law and social con- tract theories to lay the foundation for international law in a “great society of states” bound by a “law of nations” lead- ing to a universality of rights and duties (Grotius, 1925).

The rise of capitalism as an economic force, the expan- sion of trade with the newly “discovered” lands in Africa, the Pacific and the Americas, the voyages of the great mariners, and the expansion of empires that reached across the globe during the Enlightenment contributed signifi- cantly to the spread of these ideas. But it was the accep- tance of some fundamental “rights for all mankind” as en- shrined in the American and French Revolutions that gave cosmopolitanism its greatest surge. The 1789 Declaration of Human Rights and the preamble to the American Constitu- tion arose from cosmopolitan philosophy. Many of the lead- ing lights of the Enlightenment – Voltaire, Montesquieu, Addison, Hume and Jefferson among them – identified themselves as cosmopolitans in the sense that they were not subservient to a particular political or religious philoso- phy, claimed to be free of cultural prejudices, and practiced tolerance and social broadmindedness.

Immanuel Kant was a strong advocate of such views. For him all rational beings were members of a single moral community, sharing aspirations for freedom, equality and

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations

AIB Insights 2

independence within a system of self-governance and com- mon laws. This precluded any form of tyranny, including slavery or colonial exploitation, considered contrary to the higher order of all humans. Whereas some political cos- mopolitans advocated a single world state, Kant called for a more rational international order. He argued that global peace is only achievable when all states are organized along “republican” principles, group themselves into a voluntary “league of nations,” and respect the human rights not only of their own citizens but also of foreigners (Kant, 1991).

The liberal economic concepts proposed by Adam Smith in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and later in his Wealth of Nations, had a strong impact on cosmopolitan philoso- phy. Smith’s view of a world of free trading nations, one in which markets and not governments catered to the needs of ordinary people, was very much in keeping with the prima- cy of the individual in cosmopolitan philosophy.

The formation of the United Nations and other multina- tional institutions in the modern era provided for the first time a legal and institutional framework that defines, how- ever weakly, the rights and duties of the citizens of the world. Similarly, a number of actors formed either by civ- il society (NGOs) or in the economic sphere (multinational companies) have diminished the role and legitimacy of the nation state as the sole agent of political union.

One of the first acts of the United Nations was to adopt a Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948, which states that, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with rea- son and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” Other UN Covenants expanded the sphere of human rights to many dimensions fundamen- tal to modern concepts of liberty and the pursuit of happi- ness.3 More recently, the UN Global Compact, a voluntary agreement to which multinational companies may adhere, includes a set of ten “principles” by which the signatories promise to abide in managing their global operations.4 They constitute a set of obligations that global companies, and by definition their managers, must follow in order to fulfill their responsibility as global citizens.

Other supra-national institutions such as the Interna- tional Criminal Court have emerged to provide individuals legal standing under international law that goes beyond those provided in national courts. Past cases against Gen- eral Pinochet of Chile, various Serbian military comman- ders, and several African leaders are evidence of the in- creasing reach of this Court. Even national courts (such as the US’ Alien Tort Claims statute) have increasingly pros- ecuted cases for wrongdoing that occurred in foreign juris- dictions by or against national citizens.

Perhaps the most significant change in recent years has been the rise of civil society groups and NGOs in the world scene (Kriegman, 2006). Some are spontaneous, such as against the WTO in Seattle in 1999, or in opposition to war in Iraq in 2003, or against global warming in 2019. Oth- ers are structured such as the World Social Forum (WSF), Amnesty International, the Red Cross and Red Crescent So- cieties, Médecins sans Frontières, and a host of other reli- gious and lay organizations whose aim is to provide relief

in the case of famine, medical emergencies or natural dis- asters, and who have adopted the cosmopolitan vision that we have a solemn duty to aid fellow human beings in need, regardless of nationality or distance.

Cosmopolitans do not advocate a subjugation of national identity to a bland universal mold. Culture is always fluid and evolving, and human societies have continuously trad- ed goods, ideas, cuisine, music, games and people, while ab- sorbing, blending, and innovating (Appiah, 2006). As Krieg- man (2006) stated, “such hybridization makes it nearly im- possible to delineate the boundaries of a specific culture. Cosmopolitanism rejects chauvinism and values diverse cultures, regarding all people of the earth as branches of a single family tree. The diffusion of this old consciousness in the new context of globalization is the basis for forging global citizenship.”

The current backlash against globalization calls into question the very tenets of cosmopolitan thinking. The re- turn to nativist policies across major regions (e.g., the US under Trump, Brexit in the UK, and populist parties in Eu- rope, South America and Asia) rejects the notion that one has any responsibility for fellow humans when they belong to other ethnicities or countries, and have stood in opposi- tion to granting sanctuary to political refugees and to eco- nomic immigrants. Those of us committed to a cosmopoli- tan viewpoint need to seek solutions to the problems that gave rise to this counterreaction and not simply abandon the principles of mutual responsibility (Rodrik, 2017).

There are some accepted precepts that should govern the actions of any self-proclaimed global citizen in the pursuit of his/her managerial responsibilities. Thus, a global citizen is one who abides by the following standards:

• Morally, a global citizen is one who comes to the aid of those in need, whether near or far, particularly in times of natural or man-made disasters; defends the universality of human rights; and opposes slavery or any subjugation of human beings by individuals, pri- vate or public organizations, or nation states.

• Politically, he/she fosters freedom of association, ex- pression and political action; respects the right of workers to bargain collectively; takes into considera- tion his/her obligations toward environmental stew- ardship in all decisions; and fights corruption at all levels.

• Culturally, respects cultural, ethnic, religious and racial diversity in the workplace and in society; and combats discrimination in all its guises against mi- norities, women and other vulnerable groups.

• Economically, opposes any form of forced or child la- bor; promotes open and transparent business deal- ings; encourages the free flow of ideas, goods and ser- vices, capital and labor whenever possible, internally and across countries; and works towards the elimina- tion of poverty by championing programs of inclusion and economic opportunity for the poor.

They include on Civil and Political Rights, on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Geneva Convention, and conventions Against Genocide or Torture, on children’s rights, and on gender discrimination.

www.unglobalcompact.org/AbouttheGC/TheTENPrinciples/index.html

3

4

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations

AIB Insights 3

SUSTAINABILITY AND THE INDIVIDUAL

Sustainable development is essentially the effort to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Commis- sion, 1987). Wanting something better for our children and grandchildren is not a new or rare concept and adds an in- ter-temporal dimension to the care expressed in Hierocles’ circles. Global citizenship aims to reduce not only the dis- count rate applied to those distant from oneself, but also the rate applied to future generations.

Few of us over the age of 30, including the overwhelming majority of business and governmental leaders, were edu- cated to understand today’s complex, dynamic and inter- connected world. Our old ways of learning may no longer be serving us well, particularly since the issues we now face are often a result of past decisions, from the deterio- ration of the environment to the deplorable state of world health. Peter Senge has promoted “a collective awakening to new possibilities that will change how people see the world, what they value, how society defines progress and or- ganizes itself, and how institutions operate” (Senge, Smith, Kruschwitz, Laur, & Schley, 2008: 5).

Whereas recent emphasis may focus on corporate global citizenship (Schwab, 2008; Tichy, McGill, & Saint-Clair, 1997; Wood, Logsdon, Lewellyn, & Davenport, 2006), we believe that greater consideration ought to be given to the role of the individual as a global citizen. Senge and his col- leagues acknowledge the need to move beyond the concept of “triple bottom line” to one that emphasizes the “inner work of sustainability.” Ideally, “comprehensive, integrat- ed and holistic education will result in our acceptance of the interconnectedness of life on earth and lead us to take a greater responsibility for our actions and their impact on the whole” (Senge, Laur, Schley, & Smith, 2006: 97–98). We have somehow gotten lost in the scientific method and de- valued intuition at the expense of reason. We need to re- claim and “develop other forms of intelligence, including the intuitive, the emotional, the esthetic, and the spiritual” (Olalla, 2004: 66) if we are to succeed in this mission.

It is the acceptance of this responsibility that makes one a global citizen, and it is the commitment to collaboration that makes actions sustainable. John Zogby claims millen- nials are the “First Globals”; a world-wise generation that is the most outward looking, socially tolerant, and interna- tionally aware of all times (Zogby, 2008). It should then be more expedient to teach these young men and women how to be global citizens than to try to change Baby Boomers in- to accepting greater responsibility as global citizens.

CHARACTERISTICS, SKILLS, AND VALUES OF A GLOBAL CITIZEN

If ensuring the sustainability of the earth is the responsi- bility of global citizens, then what skills and values must an individual possess so as to be justly held accountable? An exercise sponsored by Canada’s International Develop- ment Agency argued for the importance of four character- istics of mental processes in global citizens: open-minded- ness, full-mindedness, fair-mindedness, and world-mind- edness. In other words, global citizens must be: (1) open to

others’ ideas and points of view, regardless of their identi- ty distance; (2) able to foresee potential problems and rec- ognize the limitations of judgment and the importance of balancing analysis with intuition; (3) impartial when deal- ing with others and not pre-judge them based on cultural or demographic characteristics; and (4) believe in “one world” (Case, 1997; Evans & Reynolds, 2004).

Global competency must also include some level of lan- guage capability, cross-cultural communication skills, and the ability to find value in “something foreign” (Hunter, 2004). Global citizens need an understanding of world his- tory, international relations, current events, and global po- litical economy. Most importantly, they must promote val- ues that support a love of and a commitment to humanity.5

Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan asked a poignant question, “Do we have shared values?”, that is, values that make cooperation easier and communication more effective (Annan, 2003). In 2000, the United Nations adopted the Millennium Declaration, which defined 8 goals on poverty eradication, world health, sustainable develop- ment and education to be achieved by 2015. This was later replaced by 17 Sustainable Development Goals adopted in 2015 as a “blueprint to achieve a better and more sustain- able future for all” by the year 2030. Whereas not all coun- tries are on track to meet these goals, considerable atten- tion and funding has been committed to the endeavor by governments and NGOs. But individuals and private corpo- rations must do their part. To remain silent and not take ac- tion is to condone the status quo, and to reject the respon- sibility of being a global citizen.

In summary, these are the skills and values global citi- zens must possess in order to act:

CHARACTERISTICS AND SKILLS

VALUES

• cognitive abilities; • courage to take action even under uncertainty; • cross-cultural competencies, including multi-lingual

proficiency; • innovativeness and creativity; • knowledge of global issues and their interdependen-

cies; • negotiation and conflict resolution skills; • self-awareness and open-mindedness; • a strategic (whole picture) perspective; • systems thinking; and • a willingness to challenge, be challenged, and to

adapt.

• a sense of justice and fair-mindedness; • respect for human dignity; • acceptance of diversity; • a belief in the power of an individual’s actions; • commitment to the sustainability of the planet and all

of its inhabitants; • empathy and a sense of community; • integrity; • personal responsibility; and • a commitment to life-long learning.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/03/we-need-to-become-global-citizens-to-rebuild-trust-in-our-globalised-world/ 5

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations

AIB Insights 4

Our next installment, at the end of this AIB Insights is- sue, reviews how the work of business schools can foster these skills and values.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

José R. de la TorreJosé R. de la Torre ([email protected]) is co- founder and Chair of the EMBA Consortium for Global Busi- ness Innovation, professor at Bologna Business School, and Founding Dean of FIU’s Chapman Graduate School of Busi- ness where he held the JK Batten Chair in Strategy (now Emeritus). He previously taught at UCLA, INSEAD, and Georgia State after earning his doctorate from Harvard Business School. His research deals with the management

of multinational firms, trust in inter-corporate collabora- tions and the importance of global citizenship.

Corinne YoungCorinne Young ([email protected]) is the Director of Gradu- ate Studies at Franklin University Switzerland. She received her Ph.D. from Tulane University. Her research and teaching centers on designing and implementing transformational learning experiences in graduate management education. She focuses her work on developing responsible leaders in a stakeholder society.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-

BY-4.0). View this license’s legal deed at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 and legal code at http://creativecom-

mons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode for more information.

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations

AIB Insights 5

REFERENCES

Annan, K. 2003, December 24. Do We Still Have Universal Values? The GlobalistThe Globalist.

Appiah, K. A. 2006. Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of StrangersWorld of Strangers. London: Penguin Books.

Byers, M. 2005. Are you a Global Citizen? Really? What Does That Mean? The TyeeThe Tyee.

Case, R. 1997. Global Education: It’s a Matter of Perspective. The Canadian Anthology of Social The Canadian Anthology of Social Studies: Issues and Strategies for TeachersStudies: Issues and Strategies for Teachers. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser University.

Commission, B. 1987. Report of the World Report of the World Commission on Environment and DevelopmentCommission on Environment and Development. General Assembly Resolution 42/187, New York: United Nations.

Dower, N. 2005. The Earth Charter and Global The Earth Charter and Global Citizenship: A Way ForwardCitizenship: A Way Forward. Netherlands: Royal Tropical Institute.

Erasmus, D. 1986. A Complaint of Peace Spurned and Rejected by the Whole World. Erasmus: Works Erasmus: Works (originally published 1521), vol. 27: 289–322. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Evans, M., & Reynolds, C. 2004. Educating for Global Educating for Global Citizenship in a Changing WorldCitizenship in a Changing World. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

Grotius, H. 1925. The Law of War and Peace The Law of War and Peace (originally published 1625). New York: Bobbs-Merrill.

Hunter, W. D. 2004. Got Global Competency? International EducatorInternational Educator, Spring: 10.

Kant, I. 1991. Perpetual Peace. In H. Reiss (Ed.), Political WritingsPolitical Writings (originally published 1795). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kriegman, O. 2006. Dawn of the Cosmopolitan: The Hope of a Global Citizens Movement. GTI Paper GTI Paper Series, 15Series, 15. Cambridge, MA: Tellus Institute. https://do i.org/10.2139/ssrn.956184.

Nussbaum, M. C. 1997. Kant and Stoic Cosmopolitanism. Journal of Political PhilosophyJournal of Political Philosophy, 5(1): 1–25.

Olalla, J. 2004. From Knowledge to Wisdom: Essays From Knowledge to Wisdom: Essays on the Crisis in Contemporary Learningon the Crisis in Contemporary Learning. Boulder, CO: Newfield Network, Inc.

Rodrik, D. 2017. Straight Talk on Trade: Ideas for a Straight Talk on Trade: Ideas for a Sane World EconomySane World Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc779z4.

Schwab, K. 2008. Global Corporate Citizenship: Working with Governments and Civil Society. Foreign Foreign AffairsAffairs, January/February.

Senge, P., Laur, J., Schley, S., & Smith, B. 2006. Learning for SustainabilityLearning for Sustainability. Cambridge, MA: Society for Organizational Learning.

Senge, P., Smith, B., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. 2008. The Necessary Revolution: How The Necessary Revolution: How Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together Individuals and Organizations Are Working Together to Create a Sustainable Worldto Create a Sustainable World. New York: Doubleday.

Tichy, N. M., McGill, A. R., & Saint-Clair, L. (Eds.). 1997. Corporate Global CitizenshipCorporate Global Citizenship. San Francisco, CA: The New Lexington Press.

Wood, D. J., Logsdon, J. M., Lewellyn, P. G., & Davenport, K. 2006. Global Business Citizenship: A Global Business Citizenship: A Transformative Framework for Ethics and Sustainable Transformative Framework for Ethics and Sustainable CapitalismCapitalism. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Zogby, J. 2008. The Way We’ll BeThe Way We’ll Be. New York: Random House.

Global Citizenship and Business Education, Part 1: Antecedents and Foundations

AIB Insights 6