There’s much I agree with, especially the observation that brand purpose defaults to earnest, preachy, self-righteous and/or cloying sentimental creative work. For me Nick’s broader criticism’s of purpose could be wrapped up in one word, ‘managerialism’, a set of soft power beliefs attitudes & values to use the organization to influence society as opposed to responding to people’s needs & desires, and it also looks to me like a lot of the heat is a corporate management power struggle between progressive and conservative perspectives.
Nick sides with shareholder primacy, echoing Friedman, but without discussing ‘stakeholder governance’ or whether corporations do have broader social aims, beyond being nicer and paying their taxes, which of course they are actually doing even when exploiting all the legal loopholes. Having broader social aims in communities used not to be remotely controversial before the Reagan/Thatcher administrations, which also ushered in the era of asset stripping and off shoring. The ‘purpose clause’ can be traced all the way back to early corporate law, purpose certainly predates Occupy, although modern iterations B-corps and benefit corporations establishment falls either side of the ‘08 financial crisis. There’s a tributary of purpose that sprang from the early ecological movement. Nick is critical of these voluntary organizations because they can be gamed and can lead to noble cause corruption, true, but any system can and will be gamed by a minority, therefore the issue becomes one of oversight and governance but not necessarily a return to the drawing board.
I do think there is a much harder genuine purpose within the system of money, markets and providing goods and services that is being ignored, where entrepreneurs are attempting to figure out, operationalize and popularize businesses that are circular in consumption, regenerative in production, cooperative in ownership, and so on, but this is an uphill struggle in a financial system where MBA types preach ‘alpha returns’ and citizens passively underwrite finance capital.
Thanks so much for being part of this, Nick!
There’s much I agree with, especially the observation that brand purpose defaults to earnest, preachy, self-righteous and/or cloying sentimental creative work. For me Nick’s broader criticism’s of purpose could be wrapped up in one word, ‘managerialism’, a set of soft power beliefs attitudes & values to use the organization to influence society as opposed to responding to people’s needs & desires, and it also looks to me like a lot of the heat is a corporate management power struggle between progressive and conservative perspectives.
Nick sides with shareholder primacy, echoing Friedman, but without discussing ‘stakeholder governance’ or whether corporations do have broader social aims, beyond being nicer and paying their taxes, which of course they are actually doing even when exploiting all the legal loopholes. Having broader social aims in communities used not to be remotely controversial before the Reagan/Thatcher administrations, which also ushered in the era of asset stripping and off shoring. The ‘purpose clause’ can be traced all the way back to early corporate law, purpose certainly predates Occupy, although modern iterations B-corps and benefit corporations establishment falls either side of the ‘08 financial crisis. There’s a tributary of purpose that sprang from the early ecological movement. Nick is critical of these voluntary organizations because they can be gamed and can lead to noble cause corruption, true, but any system can and will be gamed by a minority, therefore the issue becomes one of oversight and governance but not necessarily a return to the drawing board.
I do think there is a much harder genuine purpose within the system of money, markets and providing goods and services that is being ignored, where entrepreneurs are attempting to figure out, operationalize and popularize businesses that are circular in consumption, regenerative in production, cooperative in ownership, and so on, but this is an uphill struggle in a financial system where MBA types preach ‘alpha returns’ and citizens passively underwrite finance capital.