THE PURPOSE DEBATE Introduction
By Robert Rock

 

Back to the ‘80s: Business Roundtable’s “Purpose” Statement Redux

The group’s 1981 statement called for corporations to be “a positive force in society.” What’s different this time?

By Kristin Bresnahan

 

Three Problems With the Stakeholder Theory

Business Roundtable’s misguided decision to put shareholders last. An unpleasant déjà vu.

By Charles Elson

 

Social Good Uprooted

How America’s corporations lost their public purpose.

By David Ciepley

Former Vanguard CEO Weighs in on ‘Purpose’ & ESG

Bill McNabb says a focus on the greater good leads to long-term value

By Bill McNabb

Western Union’s First ESG Report

CEO Hikmet Ersek rides the “purpose” train, supported by the board.

By Eve Tahmincioglu

Where corporate America has been, and where it needs to go.

Spurred on by political activists, academics, lobbyists, regulators, employees, consumers, professional directorship, governance gurus, proxy advisers and, most notably, large institutional investors, environmental, social and governance issues have commandeered boardroom conversations. This unlikely and unwieldly alliance is trying to upend the decades-old doctrine of shareholder primacy, first put forward in 1932 by Adolf A. Berle, Jr., and Gardiner C. Means, and then promulgated by Milton Friedman in the early 1970s.

Friedman preached the gospel of profits-as-purpose and mocked anyone who suggested otherwise as “undermining the basis of a free society.” He posited that in a free and open market, pursuing shareholder value delivers the best goods and services to the public, optimizes employment, and creates the most wealth which can then be put to all sorts of good uses. According to Friedman, meeting its shareholders’ need for profit represents a company’s highest purpose.

Echoing through corporate boardrooms today is a new model of capitalism based on the overarching themes of purpose, inclusion, and sustainability which encompass the interests and needs of a broad array of stakeholders. Corporate chieftains are increasingly embracing this notion as evidenced by the 181 members of The Business Roundtable (BRT) who recently signed off on a proclamation entitled “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation,” which claims that companies have a “fundamental commitment to all stakeholders.”

In recent years, environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria have come to play a greater role in decisions regarding the allocation of corporate resources. Large asset managers such as BlackRock strongly support the notion that corporations should pursue a purpose as well as, or beyond, simple profits.

But not everyone is buying into this shift in priorities. Immediately after the release of BRT’s statement, many in the corporate governance community, notably the Council of Institutional Investors, forcefully rejected the notion of accountability to a spectrum of stakeholders declaring, “Accountability to everyone means accountability to no one.” In their view, CEOs are employees who work for their shareholders and thus should focus on creating value for them. They fear the corporation’s primary purpose is slipping away from its shareholder-value moorings allowing the loudest and most passionate activists to set the agenda for asset allocation.

So, where do we go from here?

In this latest installment of our year-long series titled “The Character of the Corporation: Balancing Profits and Social Good,” corporate governance thought leaders weigh in on the pros and cons of BRT’s “purpose” proclamation; the evolving character of American corporation; and the role of directors in spreading purpose and ESG principles throughout their organizations.

 


Issue: 
2019 Third Quarter

Other related articles

  • Where in the World?
    Published September 18, 2020
    By Directors and Boards
    Ambassador Philip Lader weighs in on specific geopolitical risk questions for the United StatesChinaHow should the United States manage its strategic competition with China What can be done regarding ...
  • What Faces the Nation After the Election
    Published September 18, 2020
    By Directors and Boards
    Especially amidst the pandemic Nov 3s outcome will have starkly consequential geopolitical and commercial impact says Phil Lader former US ambassador to the UK and Clinton cabinet member who has serve ...
  • Geopolitics in Governance
    Published September 18, 2020
    By Philip Lader
    nbspBoards can little afford relegating anticipation of tomorrows international news to scriptwriters of screen lifes Homeland 24 and Madame Secretary For the organizations directors serve the signifi ...
  • School’s ‘In.’ Are Women Out?
    Published August 25, 2020
    By April Hall
    Can you afford to lose gender diversityWhile working parents are used to juggling the needs of both their children and their office attempting to work from home during a pandemic has presented a slew ...