Cover of Business and Professional Ethics Journal
Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-13 of 13 documents


1. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
David Steingard Introduction to Special Issue #2: Benefit Corporations: Ethics and Efficacy of a New Corporate Form
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Perry Goldschein, Paul Miesing How Benefit Corporations Effectively Enhance Corporate Responsibility
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Corporations evolved from serving a public purpose at the beginning of the seventeenth century to, legally and culturally, primarily maximizing profit for shareholders which continues at the beginning of this twenty-first century. Government and civil society have largely continued serving the public interest over time, but have struggled to keep pace with increasing and rapidly evolving challenges in recent decades. While social entrepreneurs and the corporate sector have stepped in to help address these challenges, through the practice of corporate responsibility, they have faced unnecessary hurdles in doing so. The benefit corporation was established in 2010 both to remove these hurdles and also help further unleash the power of business to address society’s most pressing problems. Despite various criticisms, benefit corporations are doing just that – enhancing the practice of corporate responsibility in the process – and will continue to improve over time. This paper summarizes the advantages of benefit corporations, points out some shortcomings which serve as areas for improvement, and addresses some of these criticisms.
3. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Regina Robson Organizational Horcruxes: Benefit Corporations as a Container for Entity Identity
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This article examines the potential effect of organizing as a benefit corporation both on reducing transaction costs and as a container and creator of firm “identity.” It argues that to the extent that the Model Benefit Corporation Law (MBCL) creates a permissive environment—a big tent that can accommodate a diverse set of investors—it diminishes the power of the benefit organizational form to shape a unique benefit identity. Conversely, to the extent the MBCL creates a schema of mandatory defaults that unduly impedes contracting, it will discourages adoption by entrepreneurs, and risks becoming a minor aberration—perhaps one of many—on the organizational landscape. The article suggests that further empirical research is needed to determine which firms are choosing the benefit corporation form; how the benefit corporation identity may have influenced that decision; and how those firms themselves affect perceptions of benefit identity by the larger community.
4. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Daryl Koehn, Michael Hannigan Are Benefit Corporations Truly Beneficial?
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Michael Hannigan is the CEO and co-founder of Give Something Back Office Supplies, the third largest office supply company on the west coast of the United States. Hannigan began his business in 1991, long before any benefit corporation legislation was enacted. He reincorporated his business as a benefit corporation after California passed such legislation in 2011. On April 23, 2015, he spoke at the 22nd Annual Stakeholder Dialogue Speaker Series convened at the University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis, by Daryl Koehn and the Veritas Institute. His remarks cover the genesis of his interest in socially responsible business and the start of his company. Hannigan also discusses the arc of what he refers to as the “fourth sector”—the emergence of the social enterprise sector. He evaluates where benefit corporations began and shares his reflections on how they may develop in the future. Hannigan’s talk concludes with a short question and answer session with audience members at the event.
5. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Daryl Koehn, Michael Pirron Creative Financial Methods in Giving Back: An Interview with Michael Pirron, CEO, Impact Makers
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Michael Pirron is CEO of Impact Makers, an IT consulting firm based in Virginia. Impact Makers decided to reincorporate as a Benefit Corporation when Virginia passed the legislation. In this interview with Professor Daryl Koehn from DePaul University, Pirron discusses why he chose to reincorporate and their organization’s decision to give all their profits to charity. To do this, Impact Makers set up a new financial innovation to protect the social purpose of the organization. They gave all their common stock to two public charities and if the organization is ever sold, all the proceeds would go to charitable organizations in their community.
6. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Summer Brown Benefit Corporations: A Case Study in the Issues of Implementation and Adoption of the Fastest Growing Business Form in the United States
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Due to growing consumer demand for mission-driven businesses, new corporate forms have emerged over the past decade in the United States. The Benefit Corporation is the fastest-growing of these new forms. Benefit Corporations are for-profit, but allow the firm to declare a “social purpose/benefit” in its articles of incorporation and permit the firm to pursue the benefit in tandem with increasing shareholder value. This paper first attempts to evaluate how effectively states have implemented this legislation. This paper extrapolates potential problems in the irregularities of visibility and record-keeping across the various states through the analysis of data accessibility and legislative differences. Irregularities in the public rollout of this legislation affect the transparency of Benefit Corporations and, as a result, the ability for stakeholders to hold the firm accountable. Complicating these issues is the fact that Benefit Corporation advocacy is largely centralized in a few third party organizations. This paper examines some of the downfalls of such conflated public/private involvement in implementing successful innovative business structures.
7. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 2/3
Notes on Contributors
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
8. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
David Steingard Benefit Corporations: Ethics and Efficacy of a New Corporate Form
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
9. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
David Steingard, Jay Coen Gilbert The Benefit Corporation: A Legal Tool to Align the Interests of Business with Those of Society; An Interview with Jay Coen Gilbert, Co-Founder, B Lab
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Jay Coen Gilbert, co-founder of B Lab, discusses his vision for a “new economy” where business is a “force for good.” In this interview, Coen Gilbert provides an overview of how B Lab’s various initiatives—Certified B Corporations, the B Impact Assessment, B Analytics, GIIRS, and Benefit Corporations—function interdependently to accelerate a culture shift to redefine success in business. Coen Gilbert then focuses on the role of benefit corporations in this larger movement. The benefit corporation is a new legal form of business that requires a corporate purpose dedicated to “general public benefit” and the delivery of demonstrable “material positive impact on society and the environment.” Novel fiduciary and reporting requirements differentiate the benefit corporation from the traditional corporation founded on shareholder primacy. Coen Gilbert explains how the benefit corporation is better suited to create long-term shareholder value as well as sustainable value for society, the environment, and other stakeholders. He addresses critiques of and challenges to the benefit corporation as an agent of change for business.
10. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
Daryl Koehn Why the New Benefit Corporations May Not Prove to Be Truly Socially Beneficial
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Social enterprises may take a variety of legal forms (limited liability companies, nonprofit entities, etc.). This paper focuses primarily upon one particular new form increasingly popular within the United States—the “Benefit Corporation.” I evaluate whether US Benefit Corporations are likely to realize as much social benefit as is frequently claimed. Part One of the paper describes the features of Benefit Corporations as they are constituted in many states. Part Two lays out the benefits extolled by supporters of this US legal corporate form. Part Three challenges these claims and adduces some reasons for doubting whether Benefit Corporations will prove to be as socially useful as they claim to be. Part Four concludes with some suggestions for future lines of research into the nature of the firm and Benefit Corporations in particular.
11. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
Eugene Schlossberger Dual-Investor Theory and the Case for Benefit Corporations
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Benefit corporations, whose chartered mission includes attending to specific and general social benefits, are sometimes criticized as monstrous hybrids trying to serve two incompatible purposes. Dual-Investor Theory, which regards society as an investor in every business venture (since the knowledge base, infrastructure, etc. that society provides constitute a kind of capital), answers this objection by providing a natural and compelling rationale for benefit corporations. Several other objections to benefit corporations are articulated and addressed, including the problems of greenwashing and mission drift; lack of clear direction; mismatch between quantitative measures and the nature of social benefit; and the charge that benefit corporations are unnecessary and create additional costs and burdens. When benefit corporations are understood in the light of Dual-Investor Theory, they constitute a potentially significant advance, more a hybrid rose than a monstrous hybrid.
12. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
David Steingard, William Clark The Benefit Corporation as an Exemplar of Integrative Corporate Purpose (ICP): Delivering Maximal Social and Environmental Impact with a New Corporate Form
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper offers a new model of corporate purpose and applies it to the emerging legal form of the benefit corporation. First, corporate purpose is applied to the two currently dominant models of shareholder and stakeholder focus. Both are found inadequate to promote positive social and environmental impact because they remain anchored in a profit-seeking corporate purpose. Second, we offer an alterna­tive model of Integrative Corporate Purpose (ICP). Third, we apply ICP to benefit corporations as an ethically superior model for promoting the common good. The benefit corporation offers four advancements: (1) positive duties to stakeholders; (2) legal protections for managers and directors to manage for the common good; (3) a requirement to have a purpose geared toward public benefit; and (4) required report­ing of benefits to stakeholders and the environment. The implications of benefit corporations are discussed within the larger arena of corporate social responsibility.
13. Business and Professional Ethics Journal: Volume > 35 > Issue: 1
Notes on Contributors
view |  rights & permissions | cited by