« A good book | Business Book blog tour »
February 02, 2004
Can a public corporation have a conscience?
Professor Bainbridge makes an interesting post in light of our discussion at this site on the differences between publicly held and privately owned businesses. While I have argued that entrepreneurs can, and should, integrate their values into their businesses, Professor Bainbridge argues that a public corporation is not a moral actor and cannot be held responsible as an entity.
Posted February 2, 2004 01:20 PM
Comments
How do feel Professor Bainbridge's comments would apply in relation to Governments?
Posted by: Dhrumil at February 3, 2004 02:23 AM
...does it seem like stockholders only want to be called owners in good times? Seems you have to draw a line somewhere. Even if you prosecute top execs of the firm or corporation, you end up huring everyone invovled, including shareholders. If you are an owner, why can you not be affected? I guess it is just the luck of the draw...
Posted by: Robert at February 3, 2004 06:04 PM
On its face, the assertion that corporations should not be moral actors is correct. Corporations sole mandate in the U.S. is to maximize profits. If they decide include moral imperatives over and above those embedded in complying with our laws and regulations, then the shareholders will have to accept a slightly lower return on investment. I think its all up to the shareholder. The rise of socially concious investment funds indicates that our society may begin to allow corporations to include moral imperatives. But that is at the investor's choice. Not the corporations.
Posted by: Jacob at February 4, 2004 09:56 PM
at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee. He consults with a variety of businesses on start-up and growth related issues, and with larger corporations on re-establishing entrepreneurial cultures within their organizations. Dr. Cornwall's current research interests include entrepreneurial finance and entrepreneurial ethics. He has authored or co-authored four books.
