Abstract
The article delves into the concept of hybrid management from the perspective of socio-philosophical approaches that ensure the effectiveness and moral responsibility of management practices. In the face of modern challenges, such as global crises and environmental and social problems, the author underscores the urgent need to rethink traditional management strategies and implement new approaches that integrate philosophical and ethical principles. The article dissects the pragmatist approach, drawing from the ideas of William James and John Dewey, and accentuates the significance of empirical experience and introspection in the decision-making process. Pragmatism enables the creation of flexible management models that facilitate swift adaptation to changing conditions and foster innovation. The study also scrutinizes the concept of moral reflection, which injects an ethical dimension into management strategies, rendering them more sustainable and socially significant. Authors such as Peyman Tajalli and Steven Segal advocate for an ethical framework based on Emmanuel Levinas's ideas of infinite responsibility, which enables organizations to blend personal responsibility and social context in decision-making. This approach establishes a groundwork for balanced management practices that can effectively tackle internal and external challenges. The article also explores Lloyd Sandelands' ideas about man as the central element of management, which serves as a crucial counterbalance to purely economic approaches, and the study of the ethical behavior of managers by DJ Fritzsche and H. Becker, which underscores the resilience of ethical principles in different types of crises. In conclusion, the author asserts that hybrid management should prioritize socio-philosophical elements that aid in the creation of strategies that harmonize efficiency and ethics. This is essential for building sustainable organizations that can confront modern challenges and ensure long-term development by integrating moral reflection, pragmatism, and an understanding of social responsibility.
References
Liubyvyi, Ya. V. (2023). Pragmatist and Value Approaches to the Issues of War and Peace in the Post-Postmodern Era. Multiversum. Philosophical Almanac, Issue 2(178), Volume 2, pс. 64–84. https://doi.org/10.35423/2078-8142.2023.1.1.1 [In Ukrainian].
Fritzsche, D. J., Becker, H. (1983). Ethical Behavior of Marketing Managers. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 2(4), рр. 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383187
Putnam, H., Ruth, A. (2017). Pragmatism as a Way of Life. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.
Sandelands, L. (2009). The business of business is the human person: Lessons from the Catholic social tradition. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 85(1), рр. 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9751-y
Snyder, P., Hall, M., Robertson, J. (2006). Ethical rationality: A strategic approach to organizational crisis. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 63, рр. 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-3328-9
Sorbello, K. (2020). A Paradigm Shift in Management Philosophy: Future Challenges in Global Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, Volume 162(4), pс. 763–775. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29710-7_2
Tajalli, P., Segal, S. (2019). Levinas, Weber, and a Hybrid Framework for Business Ethics. Philosophy of Management, Volume 18, рр. 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-018-0100-7
Tubbs, N. (2023). Re-educating thinking: philosophy, education, and pragmatism. Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 57(2), pс. 433–443. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad031
Wicks, A. C., Freeman, R. E. (1998). Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics. Organization Science, Volume 9(2), рр. 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.2.123

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
