The above slide, about typical distrust of business– is probably typical of many Arts and Science colleagues at most colleges and universities.  Business does not have a great reputation, and the business schools often have the same bad reputation.  

Michael Naughton (St. Thomas University, MN) is a well known scholar who does work in Catholic Social Thought (CST) as it relates to business.  In a 2009 article, he articulates well the ‘disconnect’ between colleges of business and arts and science colleges at Catholic universities.  There are some practical reasons why business faculty have a difficult time seeing how to bring CST to bear on business.  As Naughton puts it (his quotes in italics**)

The Catholic social tradition is not always portrayed in the most accessible and useful manner by its proponents, especially as it relates to business. One needs to be sympathetic with deans and business faculty who find little help to envision the role of this tradition, especially the articulation of its social principles within business education. Too often the content of this tradition is perceived in terms of extrinsic moral constraints, rather than an understanding of the intrinsic character of between CST and CSR on the ‘Good Company’” 

The process of this extrinsicism with faculty, especially as it relatesto Catholic social principles, usually goes something like this:
• Theologians and philosophers articulate a list of principles, such as human dignity, common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity, which are described universally as having no explicit connection to business

• Business faculty look at the principles with a certain sense of good will, but are unclear about their relationship to business. As one faculty member responded, “The principles look innocuous enough, who can be against them?”

• Theologians and philosophers, however, see more difficulty between the principles and business practice than do their business colleagues. They insinuate that businesses, as presently constituted, are not living up to these principles. Their critiques verge on prophetic denunciations, yet often fail to apply the principles to the specific technical complications of business.
• Business faculty get defensive and respond that such theologians and philosophers, and the church in general, do not understand business and the way markets work. Yet business faculty continue to
describe their discipline only in empirical, quantitative, and technical terms, failing to engage their discipline with the demands of justice.

• The unproductive impasse continues where theologians and philosophers fail to understand the demands of business, and business faculty fail to take seriously the social vision of Catholicism.

Naughton points out:

There are many exceptions to this scenario, but it is difficult for disciplines such as theology, philosophy, and business to communicate with each other. The lack of a common understanding of the Catholic social tradition, however, is more serious than just specialized disciplines talking past each other. Such misunderstandings result in the failure of the Catholic university to fulfill its mission as future business leaders are denied a moral and spiritual vision of organizational life. If a business education in a Catholic university is to be mission-driven, it is imperative that the faculty understand the significance of Catholic social tradition for business.

I think that this impasse is very common at Catholic colleges and universities, including at my own.  There is some degree of distrust and defensiveness at work.

But Naughton is positive about Business Faculty in many respects– he says they do a better job of understanding how business and the mission of a Catholic university go together, for example, (while many A&S might feel that the practice of business is antithetical to Catholic social thought.  

Naughton asks,

Do Catholic universities and their business programs have the faculty to offer a distinctive kind of mission-driven business education, informed and animated by the Catholic social tradition? There are many positive reasons to answer affirmatively. Let me identify four of them:

• Interdisciplinary: Because most Catholic universities are not research universities there tends to be more openness to inter disciplinary engagement within their business schools. Catholic  universities have strong departments in philosophy, theology, and literature, which provide the conditions for fruitful conversations between business and liberal education.
• Business Ethics: Catholic business schools have been leaders in developing the discipline of business ethics and in helping the business community to see ethics as integral to running a business.
• Spirituality: The language of vocation, calling, and spirituality has become increasingly incorporated into the curriculum and research of business faculty. The recent series of Lilly grants on vocation has
contributed in this area. Many faculty of Catholic universities have participated in the Management, Spirituality, and Religion interest groups within the Academy of Management as well.
• Institutional Mission: Faculty within Catholic business schools understand the importance of institutional mission and identity better than some of their liberal education colleagues. There is a strong belief that students should engage the Catholic social tradition with business issues.

But Naughton says that, despite these strengths, there are often some problems in many business programs as well:

There are several underlying problems within Catholic universities and their business programs. These concern hiring patterns and the lack of faculty development programs on mission. The majority of
business faculty, Catholic or otherwise, come to Catholic business schools with the little formation in literature, history, philosophy, and theology required to give them a distinctively disciplined perspective on their own scholarly pursuits. A growing number of faculty members have no experience in Catholic education. They often lack knowledge of the Catholic social tradition and, increasingly, many have no experience of any kind of liberal education. More and more faculty in Catholic business schools have a purely technical education, embark on a Ph.D. program that ignores moral and spiritual questions, and reduce their research interests to empirical, quantitative, and so-called nonnormative questions.  Once they arrive at Catholic business schools, little progress is made in understanding the meaning of a mission-driven Catholic business education.

Because of this, leaders within Catholic business schools have not recognized the full dimension of mission drift within their schools. While often optimistic and confident about their schools, if leaders fail adequately to grasp the gap between operation and aspiration, it is doubtful whether the religious mission of Catholic business schools will survive, let alone thrive. This doubt stems both from the understated  character of Catholic mission and leaders’ lack of understanding of the
Catholic intellectual and social tradition.
Despite these obstacles, faculty from Catholic business schools and programs can make a significant contribution to the fulfillment of a robust, differentiated business education. If Catholic business schools can keep themselves from being hijacked by an instrumental rationality that attempts to escape moral agency, and resist abdicating their custodial role of mission to theology and philosophy, then they can play an important role in advancing the mission and identity of Catholic universities.

But its not just the Business School side who have some issues to deal with.  Naughton points out some problems with the A&S side as well:

Faculty within liberal education departments, especially theology and philosophy, play a crucial role in how they interact with business faculty and how they engage questions of work and business. Unfortunately, there is a divide in many Catholic universities between liberal and business faculty that makes it difficult to provide a more integrated education for business students. Philosophy and theology faculty often operate with a Platonic/Aristotelian bias against work and, in particular,
business.15 They also have little interest in understanding the work of their business colleagues. While philosophy faculty have engaged with business ethics, although the relationship has been an uneasy one, theologians have tended to ignore the question of business, either focusing on the question of Catholic social thought abstractly and theoretically or focusing on its socio-political implications.

Perhaps the greatest harm from all this is a schizophrenic education for students: 

This strained relationship creates a fragmented education for students. When a gulf between liberal and business education occurs, students get the impression that they are receiving two types of education: one that makes them more human and one that makes them more money. They are uncertain about how the two fit together. Challenges between the Catholic Social Tradition and
Business Theory and Practice: The Importance of Practical Wisdom The Catholic social tradition and its ability to foster practical wisdom is key to overcoming this kind of fragmentation in a student’s education. It is a religious and moral tradition that seeks the integration of the person: contemplative and active, body and soul, individual and social, and physical and spiritual. 

Living the life of a faculty member, I know that it is difficult already to get all the things done which are immediately pressing, much less attempt to build bridges to colleagues in other colleges at our university.  There are natural factors which lead to the disconnect, and in fact I would argue that many times there are parallel movements going on in the different colleges, which are unknown to the other colleges.  This can even be true from one department to the next within a college.  But what is often difficult is a cross-uni-versity awareness of how to communicate with or learn from each other.  The potential fragmentation of our faculties, as well as a disparate fragmentation of our students education, are the result.

**All quotes are from Michael Naughton, “A Complex Mission: Integration of Catholic
Social Tradition with Business Education” in The Journal of Catholic Higher Education” 28:1 (2009)