Agricola and plunkitt

Plunkitt would agree that there was such a thing as an honest profit and a dishonest profit. If a political party, State, and personal interests stand to gain an advantage, he would see such a venture as something that was as justifiable and therefore being an honest profit. On the other hand, he would see stealing from others as dishonest profit and would condemn such an action. In other words, he may justify “ a little” corruption as long as it doesn’t amount to stealing from others and as long as it benefits the State as well as himself. From a business perspective, Plunkitt does seem to have the dynamics of organizational behavior right. Buying something for a low price and selling it for a higher price is the essence of business, and Plunkitt’s views were in line with this sentiment. For him, corruption means actually stealing from others, while trying to make a profit is not corrupt at all. Plunkitt also believed in seeing opportunities and taking them and realized that who you know is more important than what you know. Both of these concepts are widely seen as accurate in the business world.