The free
market can save us, but first the free market needs to change whom it rewards.
In 1970, Milton
Friedman famously declared, "The social responsibility of
business is to increase profits," and anything else was "pure and unadulterated
socialism." According to this doctrine, business
activity that cannot be attached to a material financial outcome is treated
with suspicion and, ideally, discarded. Employee well-being, customer loyalty,
fair hiring practices, community prosperity, and environmental vitality are
important only if they drive profits.
But businesses and
their stakeholders have always attempted to understand and capitalize on the
connections between a company’s social and environmental profile, and its
financial interests, throughout the history of commerce. And over the years,
various schools of thought have emerged that have sought to develop a more
enlightened calculus around how to capture and report on corporate performance,
value, risk, and reward beyond standardized financial filings.
Though we now
think of corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a shorthand for good
management in commercial enterprise, the truth is that business and financial
leaders have been thinking this way well before anyone put a label on it. The
famous GE "Blue Books," which became the management bible for a
generation of corporate leaders, talked about companies acting
in the "balanced best interests" of all stakeholders.
The
facts of the matter are that the basic connections between corporate
sustainability and financial performance have been established. Where the lines
are drawn—or, more accurately, where the connections are strongest—is a
question of judgment and circumstance. But in the broadest sense, a correlation
between profitability and CSR leadership has been demonstrated.
Causation, on
the other hand, has been more difficult to pin down. (As an aside, it’s worth
pointing out that defining causative links between business performance and
financial outcomes in any realm is hard to define; otherwise, I would be
writing this piece from my luxury yacht in the Mediterranean instead of my
office in New York City.) All we know for sure is that successful CSR
strategies have been instrumental in helping to reduce business operating
costs, boost top-line growth, attract and retain talent, enhance culture,
attract shareholders, win public support, engage communities, and more.
Now
the time has come to elevate the discussion still further: to go beyond asking
how CSR can boost profitability or enhance market performance, and address how
business can be used as a force for good in the world. Is there a higher
purpose for business beyond simply making money and providing employment?
Surely the answer has to be yes.
In his "Revolution of
Values" speech in 1967, Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr. said, "A true revolution of values will soon cause
us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present
policies." I believe there is a revolution of values beginning where it
can arguably have greatest effect: the capital markets. The challenge in this
case is how to build a more just marketplace that better serves the broader
interests of society as a whole.
It’s
a challenge that lies closer to the economic philosophy of Adam Smith himself,
in which justice and freedom are placed alongside prosperity for all as guiding
tenets. I am convinced that were he alive today, Smith would recognize some of
the more grotesque sins associated with early capitalism—the long work days,
low wages, egregious profiteering, and child labor, to name a few—that inspired
his original thinking.
For the plain truth
is, we need a fully functioning free market system now more than ever.
Philanthropy alone is not enough to solve today’s problems. Nor is government
action. Only free market enterprise can muster the resources and establish the
systemic solutions we need right now. To date, the visions of capital market
reform have been largely generated from the top down, by experts, politicians,
and insiders. One problem with this approach is they have been processed
through the orthodoxy of financial materiality.
According
to a major poll conducted by my organization, JUST
Capital, earlier in 2015, the overwhelming sense among
Americans—regardless of political ideology or income bracket—is that
corporations are too focused on meeting the needs of shareholders, and need to
better balance the interests of customers, communities, employees, and the
environment. What’s more, we know that although trust in big business is low,
more than 90% of Americans surveyed said it's important to measure corporate
justness, and more than 75% said such information would influence the decisions
they make as consumers, employees, or investors.
By establishing the
first nationwide index of just business performance based solely on the
public’s attitudes, preferences, and values, we think we can begin to address
this unmet need. Counterintuitively, we also think that many companies will
actually want this information too. What business doesn't want to know what its
customers, its employees, and its wider stakeholders truly care about when it
comes to performance? Once this is in place, we can begin to provide both
consumers and companies with the information they need to incentivize and
reward more just corporate behavior.
This
idea of using the power of the markets to drive change is by no means new. But
it is effective. Shifting a mere 1% of total personal consumption to companies
that prioritize the things we care about would channel some $120 billion per
year—almost half as much as Americans donate to charity annually—toward
companies that provide greater employee benefits, pay a living wage, and make
products that are healthy and safe; strengthen our communities; protect the
environment; respect customers; pay their fair share of taxes; and other things
we value. Now that’s a marketplace we can all be proud of.
-Fast Company
No comments:
Post a Comment