Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category

The Democratization of Business

by Olsson Center staff

A major U.S. bank announces new fees for checking accounts and customers revolt. Many opt to close their accounts and take their business to competitors. A popular mail movie rental service changes its strategy much to its faithful customers’ chagrin. In both instances, social media and traditional media provide a forum for customers to express their discontent. Each company decides to back down, at least in part due to the protests.

As consumers are becoming more educated they are engaging more with the companies with which they do business. This is especially true with educated millennial generation who choose to support more socially conscious companies. Consumers expect products to be tailored to their tastes and expecting companies to be accountable.

There are other places where we see changing stakeholder expectations impact how business gets done. Customers were used to the same 500 products in grocery stores for decades. With the advent of mass-produced organic foods, many consumers demanded more selection from their grocery stores. We now have more choices for food than we ever had in the past. Customers have made it clear that they do not always take what is given to them, especially if someone else is willing to provide what they want.

We are also starting to see signs of a major shift in the wireless carrier market. Consumers have grown tired of the inflexible two-year contract plans, and some companies are changing their strategy to capitalize on this discontent.

Growing stakeholder demands and technology changes appear to be driving an increase in business accountability. Review websites like Angie’s List and Yelp give consumers a voice they never had before. Transparency, driven by the Internet, is changing how businesses operate. These changes add fuel to the idea that Stakeholder Theory has come into fruition, particularly for customers.

New Models of Business in Society

New Models of Business in Society

New Models of Business in Society

This fall Professor R. Edward Freeman will teach a free, five-week course online about the ethics of business in society. “New Models of Business in Society” is being offered through Coursera as a new way to learn. The course will not require readings, tests or graded assignments, one only has to listen and learn.

The course examines the emergence of a new story about business. This new story locates business within a societal framework. Almost every business creates or destroys value for customers, suppliers, employees, communities and society, in addition to shareholders and other financiers. A number of new models of business can be built on this idea such as corporate responsibility, philanthropy, shared value and sustainability. Profits and stakeholder value go together, and this course explains how. The final session explores the idea of how to become a stakeholder entrepreneur and create a business that makes money and makes the world a better place.

Registration is now open and the course begins on 2 September 2013. Watch a short video about the course by R. Edward Freeman here.

 

 

Big Data and Ethics

by Olsson Center staff

Big Data was one of the buzzwords of 2012. It captured the imaginations of journalists, academics and the business world. Like all buzzwords, it encapsulates a phenomenon that was already in existence.

Large companies have been using big data for years to understand their customers and their market. University and non-profit organizations have used data mining to learn more about their prospective donors. After 9/11, big data blossomed in the community of federal intelligence agencies and defense contractors. Online users have been freely offering personal information on social networking sites for more than a decade.

Big data is a powerful business tool, with great potential for solving the toughest problems. However, it is the potential of ill intent that concerns many. In a January InformationWeek article, columnist Eric Lundquist says there is a growing need for big data ethics experts in modern business. How should organizations use big data responsibly?

Major concerns include privacy, consent to disclose information, transfers of information (buying and selling), security and uses of the information. Do consumers totally trust the companies to be good stewards of their information? Perhaps one of the most famous cases involved the father of a teen girl who was upset with Target after the company sent his daughter coupons for baby products. It turned out the company had deduced that the girl was pregnant based upon purchases while her father was unaware of the pregnancy.

Are all stakeholders taken into account when big data is at work? While in most of these cases the individual is the consumer stakeholder, but increasingly the individual is becoming the product. For example, Facebook packages user information to their true consumers, companies wishing to advertise on the site. Certainly the Internet has contributed to the amount and availability of big data.

In terms of enforcement, history has shown that government regulation tends to lag new technology. Have we as individuals fully grasped the power and consequences of big data in our daily lives?

The Coming Transparency of Organizations

Recently, the Motley Fool’s Tom Gardner spoke with Darden School of Business students about how technology is changing the workplace. Rather than reciting the usual clichés, Gardner offered fresh insights for the students who will soon be on the job market.

gardner at dardenFirst, he said that every company must invest in technology in some way or they will be left behind. “If you’re not a technology company, you’re in trouble,” Gardner told the students. With the rapid pace of competition and the global economy, companies must invest just to keep up.

Second, he stressed that online networks have increased transparency like never before. “You will not be able to maintain the privacy of your organization,” said Gardner. He cited the example of the website Glassdoor.com as a powerful tool for applicants and investment analysts. He explained, “No organization can hide being a nightmare place to work.” Companies that were used to concealing bad management practices will now have to be more accountable to their stakeholders. In turn poorly managed companies are less profitable and sustainable.

As part of his analysis of companies, he looks for companies that are well-run and purpose driven as keys to long-term success.

Are We Oversimplifying Value?

by Andrew Wicks and Jeffrey Harrison

The notion of value is often overly simplified and narrowed to focus on economic returns (i.e. shareholder returns). Stakeholder Theory provides an appropriate lens for considering a more complex perspective of the value that stakeholders seek as well as new ways to measure it. We have developed a four-factor perspective for defining value that includes, but extends beyond, the economic value stakeholders seek. To highlight its distinctiveness, we compare this perspective with three other popular performance perspectives. You can read more about this perspective in “Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance” in the latest Business Ethics Quarterly.

chart with upward trendThe stakeholder perspective on value offered draws attention to those factors that are most closely associated with building more value for stakeholders, and in so doing, allows academics to better measure it and enhances managerial ability to create it.

 

 

 

 

The Future of Capitalism

Professor R. Edward Freeman was featured in a closing plenary panel at the Eighth Bentley Global Business Ethics Symposium. The panel focused on trends, challenges and possibilities with respect to the enterprise of the future. The following remarks come from the conference proceedings.

Symposium-header_0

Freeman began the conversation by examining the issues underlying responsible capitalism and ways that the current business model could be improved. Freeman emphasized four core challenges:

  1. the need to recalibrate the traditional business model,
  2. broaden the idea of purpose,
  3. focus on creating value for a broader range of stakeholders
  4. and recast the narrative about business.

Criticizing the dominant model of shareholder maximization, he argued that this model “misses the mark in terms of understanding what business really does.” As he continued, “Consider the limitations when attempting to think of a company that only cares for shareholder value… many firms, especially large corporations, engage in philanthropy and corporate social responsibility (CSR).”

In moving toward a model of responsible capitalism, Freeman emphasized the importance of entrepreneurial spirit. “Most entrepreneurs start their business precisely because they want to remake the world,” he argued. As a way of remaking that world, he suggested that the idea of shareholder value must be broadened to include philanthropy, CSR, sustainability and stakeholder value, which lie at the core of conscious capitalism.

As he continued, it is important to think about how businesses work instead of how markets work, stressing the entrepreneurial purpose of improving customers’ lives. “Businesses start with a purpose and that purpose evolves,” Freeman noted, pointing to Whole Foods’ John Mackey who started his business to provide good food to the community. Whole Foods’ purpose expanded as it evolved, but it “was never to maximize shareholder value…we can think about responsible capitalism as turning loose our entrepreneurial spirit.”

Turning to stakeholder theory, which he argued is how businesses actually work, the underlying challenge is to “find a way to simultaneously satisfy customers, suppliers, employees, community, our shareholders.” As he continued, friction in any area of business can be a source of value creation. Using green technologies as an example, Freeman underscored that these advances emerged from community concerns, the push for good working environments and the quality movement.

Concluding his comments, Freeman turned to his fourth challenge of remaking the narrative about business, which should be concerned with purpose and creating value for stakeholders. “The reason capitalism works,” he argued, “is because human beings are complicated – not because we are selfish. When people want to be great they want to be part of something that is bigger than they are… when we make voluntary decisions to collaborate to work together and create value, society flourishes.”  Finishing his remarks, he noted that business is an institution of hope, but he cautioned that business schools are falling short of raising an appropriate level of awareness about these critical challenges and that calls for reform.

Ethics and Business Schools

The Darden School of Business was recently ranked the number two business school for ethics by Bloomberg Businessweek. The rankings were generated through a survey of recent MBA graduates around the world. Darden has long prided itself on including ethics in the core of its program.

Over the years, there has been much debate about teaching ethics in business schools. Two of the common questions raised are:
1) should ethics be integrated into all coursework, and
2) should ethics courses be required or taught as electives?

These questions are really a false choice. Business schools need to understand that ethics should be background for all disciplines of business.

Why Do Leaders Act Unethically?

R. Edward Freeman

R. Edward Freeman, photo: Dan Addison, U.Va. Public Affairs

Recently R. Edward Freeman joined Harvard Business School’s Max Bazerman for a forum on leadership and ethics at the Frank Batten School of Leadership & Public Policy. Freeman answered the question “Why do leaders act unethically?” with the following points:

 

 

  1. Some leaders do not know what they are doing is wrong or they lack the skills to make the right choice. Plato says, “to know the right is to do the right.”
  2. It’s a question of character. Besides being the father of Capitalism, Adam Smith also wrote about the character of virtue and its importance in commerce.
  3. Situations matter a great deal. The context in which leaders become enmeshed can affect their decision making.
  4. According to Aristotle, leaders sometimes face competing motivations or weakness of will.
  5. They have a narrow framing of what leadership is supposed to be.
  6. They can also have a narrow framing of what ethics is supposed to be.
  7. Often leaders do not see the connection they have to followers and the need to inspire others to be the best they can be.

Watch the entire forum online.

To Whom is a Corporation Responsible?

Guest post by Patricia Werhane, Olsson Center Senior Fellow and Professor at DePaul University

The evolution of stakeholder theory, from the 19th century prioritization of owners or shareholders to the late 20th century stakeholder perspective, reflects how companies affect or are affected by customers, employees, suppliers, and communities, as well as shareholders. Although concerns about the environment were evident even before the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1970, it was not until the 1990s that the “to whom” was further expanded in stakeholder thinking to include corporate responsibilities to the environment and the communities in which they operate. According to one commentator, “[in the 21st century, however, sustainability isn’t just about saving the planet. It’s about opportunity – reinventing business models to better compete in the global economy or building shareholder value in ways that help to solve some of the world’s most profound social, economic and environmental challenges. (Shelly Schwartz, “Sustainability Evolves from Fad to Force”). These business models include triple- bottom-line measurement, and various forms of socially entrepreneurial ventures and social investments.

Triple-bottom-line thinking is based on the assumption that global companies are responsible, not merely for their economic value-added, but also for their social and environmental impacts. Triple-bottom-line measurement applies quantitative measurements to corporate environmental footprints and community impacts, as well as to their economic bottom lines, with the goal to have comparable data analyses and similar quantitative outcomes across the three measures. Triple-bottom-line initiatives such as Unilever’s are slowly on the increase in global corporations, particularly in Europe and South Africa. The idea is to create criteria that quantitatively measure corporate impact on “people, the planet and profits,” as Shell Oil and other companies stated it, with the aim of improving performance in all those three dimensions.

Stakeholder Engagement and Firm Resiliency

Resilient organizations recognize and absorb the effects of stressful situations and experience positive outcomes despite such hardships. Olsson Center Fellow Jared Harris and Darden Ph.D. candidate Megan Hess explore the phenomenon of organizational resilience and extend current theory to explain its antecedent influences. Analysis suggests that resilience results not only from beliefs, processes, and structures that enable coping, as has been suggested by current theory, but also from the organization’s stance toward its stakeholders.

The study included a qualitative analysis of 150 small and medium-sized enterprises experiencing significant hardship and an in-depth description of the beliefs, processes, and structures. It was found that firms not only survive environmental adversity but also emerge strengthened. Evidence suggests that deeper engagement with stakeholders as a response to hardship may be correlated with firm growth. These findings extend our understanding of stakeholder theory by illustrating a concrete way in which stakeholder engagement can lead to firm resilience and success.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


(Contains 1 attachments.)