A few years ago, we published research articles in the highly regarded Journal of Business Ethics in which we presented a finding that may be disturbing in the present situation: Use of coercion, threats, punishment and restrictions as an...
moreA few years ago, we published research articles in the highly regarded Journal of Business Ethics in which we presented a finding that may be disturbing in the present situation: Use of coercion, threats, punishment and restrictions as an influence strategy may have the opposite effect of what is intended. Our studies suggest that the use of "coercive power" often leads to "counteracting power" that creates conflict and eliminates trust and consensus—thereby reducing the shared responsibility and duty that we need now. As regards Covid-19, such a regime leads to the termination of the collective "social contract." Furthermore, the use of "coercive force" can produce negative or even dysfunctional effects. It is not surprising that we now see demonstrations in Italy, the UK, the United States and Germany against strict measures that people perceive as intrusive "coercive power." The use of coercion can lead to more undesirable effects than the pandemic it intends to stamp out. Often, centralized measures come in the wrong place at the wrong time for the wrong groups.
