82,891
edits
Stakeholder capitalism: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
So before we cast the poor shareholders’ interests to the wind, ask this: by switching to stakeholder capitalism, ''[[Cui bono|who benefits]]''? | So before we cast the poor shareholders’ interests to the wind, ask this: by switching to stakeholder capitalism, ''[[Cui bono|who benefits]]''? | ||
=== | ===Stakeholder capitalism means never having to say you’re sorry === | ||
When shareholders hold the whip hand, an executive’s goal is simple. ''Make [[money]]''. That clarity of purpose evaporates the moment that remit expands. Multiple stakeholders means multiple interests, which ''must'' [[Conflict of interest|conflict]]. How do you arbitrate between ''creditors'' and ''the local community''? Between ''the environment'' and ''customers''? Between penguins and polar bears? | When shareholders hold the whip hand, an executive’s goal is simple. ''Make [[money]]''. That clarity of purpose evaporates the moment that remit expands. Multiple stakeholders means multiple interests, which ''must'' [[Conflict of interest|conflict]]. How do you arbitrate between ''creditors'' and ''the local community''? Between ''the environment'' and ''customers''? Between penguins and polar bears? | ||
| Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
Whose interests have priority? Why? Now a failure to generate a decent cash return can be blamed on — well, ''anything'' — your success in reducing the number of smokers in the accounts department, or your community outreach team spent all your excess cash on beautifying a local park, or you chose a buildings manager who was twice the going rate but had a better anti-modern slavery policy. | Whose interests have priority? Why? Now a failure to generate a decent cash return can be blamed on — well, ''anything'' — your success in reducing the number of smokers in the accounts department, or your community outreach team spent all your excess cash on beautifying a local park, or you chose a buildings manager who was twice the going rate but had a better anti-modern slavery policy. | ||
Stakeholder capitalism means the executive class always has an excuse. ''Always''. For ''everything''. To run a company ''for the world at large'' is to run it ''for no-one''. And when a [[professional-managerial class]] of agents can’t work out who ''else’s'' interests to put first, what do we expect them to do? | |||
===Are corporations best-placed to look after everyone else’s interests?=== | ===Are corporations best-placed to look after everyone else’s interests?=== | ||