Search

Purpose: The links between moral communication and legal communication have long been studied in sociology of law. Little has yet been said about moral communication invoking when communication in the legal system is impossible, ineffective or uncertain. The paper fills this gap to demonstrate that systems theory-based sociology of law can effectively recognise the role of moral communication in such situations. Design/methodology/approach: The paper presents an empirical study of moral communication in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). It focused on situations when SMEs' interactions with function systems, particularly the legal system, result in irremovable legal uncertainty. The data depict strategies of managing such uncertainty and were obtained in a paths-to-justice survey of 7,292 owners and managers of SMEs and 101 in-depth interviews. The findings are interpreted using the author's concept of "uncertainty translation", rooted in Luhmann's systems theory. It suggests that business organisations such as SMEs deal with the ubiquitous uncertainty in their operations by translating it into a convenient type. Findings: The study distinguishes between formative and absorbing moral communication and finds that both types play a role in steering the uncertainty translation mechanism in SMEs. Six scenarios of invoking moral communication are identified in SMEs dealing with legal uncertainty. In such scenarios, moral communication facilitates the translation of business uncertainty "away from law". Under some circumstances, this, in turn, leads to latent systematic results, reflexively affecting the legal system, the economic system and the SMEs. Research limitations/implications: In its core argument, the study is based on qualitative material. While it identifies empirical scenarios of invoking moral communication, it does not report the prevalence of these scenarios due to methodological limitations. Originality/value: The study results pose questions related to the staple theoretical issue in post-Luhmannian social systems theory: functional differentiation. If moral communication–a type of communication not linked to any social system–can produce far-reaching, systematic results that affect function systems, then the functional differentiation thesis should be less pronounced than Luhmann typically stressed. This said, the paper argues that the contradiction between the findings and Luhmannian theory of morality is only apparent and may be reconciled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The paper aims to relate the four modes of coexistence of goal-orientated systems – conflict, hierarchy, the niche and cooperation – to static behavioral descriptions of social systems.Design/methodology/approach Analyzing the options for interactions of goal-orientated systems leads the four modes of coexistence. These show certain behavioral characteristics. Searching for these characteristics in selected behavioral descriptions in organizational theory, sociology, political science and system science allows relating them to certain modes.Findings In organizations, the four modes of coexistence show in general (Cameron and Quinn) and dyadic interaction patterns (Argyris). In sociology, they show in educational schemes preparing for specific modes (Bernstein) and in different exchange patterns (Polanyi). In political theory, the four modes of coexistence show in preferred policies of parties, in institutional development, in oligarch power politics (Winters) and in external policy. In system science, they show in problem solving strategies (Jackson) and “mindscapes” (Murayama).Research limitations/implications The analysis is restricted to static patterns leaving out dynamic developments, for example, in networks.Practical implications Together with previous investigations, the paper shows how behavioral descriptions ranging from psychology to politics correspond to the four modes of coexistence, and it suggests interrelations and alignments of the modes via various levels of societal organization.Originality/value The four modes of coexistence provide an unequivocal theoretical framework that allows finding parallels in behavioral descriptions ranging from psychology via sociology to politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]