Assessing the Accountability of the Benefit Corporation: Will This New Gray Sector Organization Enhance Corporate Social Responsibility?
- 2.2k Downloads
In recent years the benefit corporation has emerged as a new organizational form dedicated to legitimizing the pursuit of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Eschewing traditional governmental authority, the benefit corporation derives its moral legitimacy from the values of its owners and the oversight of a third party evaluator. This research identifies the benefit corporation as a new type of gray sector organization (GSO) and applies extant theory on GSOs to analyze its design. In particular, it shows how the theory of GSO accountability can be used to assess the potential of benefit corporations for enhancing CSR. This research first examines the statutes that have established benefit corporations in five states in the US, along with bills in other states, to show how legislation defines their specific public benefits and holds them accountable for delivering these benefits. It then compares the accountability of the benefit corporation with that of other corporate-centric GSOs, e.g., GSOs that closely resemble traditional corporations. It concludes with significant design-based concerns about the utility of the benefit corporation as an effective organization for implementing CSR.
KeywordsAccountability B-corporation Benefit corporation Government-sponsored enterprise Gray sector organization
Corporate social responsibility
Gray sector organization
Quasi-autonomous nongovernmental organization
- Adams, S. (2010). Capitalist monkey wrench: Can a new corporate structure get companies to do good by not always putting shareholders first? Forbes Magazine, April 12. http://Forbes.com. Accessed November 15, 2010.
- Archibald, T. (2007). A new kind of company. Inc, 29(7), 23–24.Google Scholar
- B Corporation. (2009). B Corporation Annual Report. http://www.bcorporation.net/index.cfm/fuseaction/content.page/nodeID/dec9e60f-392c-4207-8538-be73be69cf85/externalURL//. Accessed February 8, 2011.
- B Corporation. (2011). Benefit corporation legislation. http://www.bcorporation.net/publicpolicy. Accessed October 4, 2011.
- B Corporation. (2011). Make it official. http://www.bcorporation.net/become0/official. Accessed February 8, 2011.
- B Corporation Directory. (2011). http://www.bcorporation.net/community/search. Accessed February 10, 2011.
- B Impact Assessment. (2010). Version 2.0, Sector: Manufacturing, Employees: 30+ http://www.bcorporation.net/resources/bcorp/documents/2010-B-Impact-Assessment%20(1).pdf. Accessed February 8, 2011.
- Blair, M., & Stout, L. (2006). Specific investment: Explaining anomalies in corporate law. Journal of Corporation Law, 31(3), 719–744.Google Scholar
- Bochel, C., & Bochel, H. (2004). The UK social policy process. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Brummer, J. J. (1991). Corporate responsibility and legitimacy: An interdisciplinary analysis. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
- Business Associations Committee of the Section on Business Law of the Pennsylvania Bar Association: undated, ‘Amendments to the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes with Official Source Notes and Committee Comments’. www.bcorporation.net/resources/bcorp/…/Draft_Pennsylvania-Legislation.pdf . Accessed February 20. 2011.
- City of Philadelphia. (2009). Bill No. 090119-A, An ordinance amending chapter 19-2600 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled “Business Privilege Taxes”.Google Scholar
- Clapp, J. (1998). The privatization of global environmental governance: ISO 14000 and the developing world. Environmental Governance, 4, 295–316.Google Scholar
- Connor, P. E. (1980). Organizations: Theory and design. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.Google Scholar
- Coppock, R., & Dierkes, M. (1973). Corporate responsibility does not depend on public pressure. Business and Society Review/Innovation, 6, 82–89.Google Scholar
- Cutler, C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (Eds.). (1999). Private authority in international politics. New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
- Dembosky, A. (2010). Protecting companies that mix profitability, values. National Public Radio, March 9. http://npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124468487. Accessed September 7, 2010.
- Denison, D. R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Donlan, T. G. (2009). Engines of destruction: Following the impulse that led Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster. Barron’s, December 21, 51.Google Scholar
- Dyer, W. G. (1982). Patterns and assumptions: The keys to understanding organizational culture. Office of Naval Research Technical Report TR-ONR-7.Google Scholar
- Greve, C. (1999). Quangos in Denmark and Scandinavia: Trends, problems and perspectives. In M. V. Flinders & M. J. Smith (Eds.), Quangos, accountability, and reform: The politics of quasi-government (pp. 83–108). Basingstoke, UK): Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
- Haufler, V. (2001). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
- Hays, C. L. (2000). Ben & Jerry’s to Unilever, with attitude. The New York Times, April 13. http://nytimes.com/2000/04/13/business/ben-jerry-s-to-unilever. Accessed September 7, 2010.
- Hogarty, R. A. (2002). The paradox of public authorities in Massachusetts: Massport and Masspike. New England Journal of Public Policy, 17, 19–37.Google Scholar
- http://Fourthsector.net. Accessed October 2, 2011.
- Koppell, J. G. S. (2003). The politics of quasi-government: Hybrid organizations and the dynamics of bureaucratic control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Maryland General Assembly. (2010). Session, department of legislative services: 2010, ‘Fiscal and Policy Note, House Bill 1009’.Google Scholar
- Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.Google Scholar
- Meidinger, E. (2001). Environmental certification programs and US environmental law: Closer than you may think. Environmental Law Reporter, 31, 10162–10179.Google Scholar
- Mickels, A. (2009). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Reconciling the ideals of a for-benefit corporation with director fiduciary duties in the U.S. and Europe. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 32(1), 271.Google Scholar
- Moe, R. C., & Kosar, K. R. (2005). The quasi government: Hybrid organizations with both government and private sector legal characteristics. Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, May 18.Google Scholar
- Palmås, K. (2005). The UK public interest company: The idea, its origins, and its relevance for Sweden. A report commissioned by the Swedish National Audit Office.Google Scholar
- Pennsylvania Bar Association. (2010). Amendments to the Pennsylvania consolidated statutes with official source notes and committee comments.Google Scholar
- Perry, J., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinction in organizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 13, 182–201.Google Scholar
- Purssell, A. (1999). Local government and the unelected state. In M. V. Flinders & M. J. Smith (Eds.), Quangos, accountability and reform (pp. 132–143). New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
- Senate of California. (2011). S. 201, introduced February 8 by Senator DeSaulnier.Google Scholar
- Senate of Maryland. (2010). S. 690, Chapter 97, (enacted).Google Scholar
- Senate of New Jersey. (2010). S. 2170, 214th Legislature, (introduced).Google Scholar
- Senate of New York. (2010). S. 7855, Calendar 72, (passed Senate).Google Scholar
- Senate of Vermont. (2010). S. 263, Sec. 1. 11A V.S.A. chapter 21, (enacted).Google Scholar
- Skelcher, C. (1998). The appointed state: Quasi-governmental organizations and democracy. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Social Capital Markets. (2010). http://socialcapitalmarkets.net/about-socap/. Accessed January 4, 2010.
- Social Capital Markets: At the Intersection of Money and Meaning. (2010). http://socialcapitalmarkets.net/about-socap/. Accessed December 28, 2010.
- Stanton, T. H. (2002). Government-sponsored enterprises: Mercantilist companies in the modern world. Washington DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar
- State of Maryland. (2010). Laws of Maryland.Google Scholar
- State of Maryland, Maryland General Assembly. (2010). House Bill 1009, Corporations—Benefit Corporation.Google Scholar
- State of New Jersey, 214th Legislature. (2010). Senate, No. 2170, July 1.Google Scholar
- State of Vermont. (2010). No. 113: An act relating to the Vermont Benefit Corporations Act.Google Scholar
- Stout, L. A. (2008). Why we should stop teaching Dodge v. Ford. Virginia Law & Business Review, 3(1), 163–176.Google Scholar
- Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.Google Scholar
- The Economist. (2009). Capital markets with a conscience: social investing grows up. The Economist, September 1. http://www.economist.com/node/14347606. Accessed December 28, 2010.
- The Economist. (2010). Social innovation: Let’s hear those ideas. The Economist August 12, 2010. http://www.economist.com/node/16789766?story_id=16789766. Accessed November 15, 2010.
- Tozzi, J. (2009). Turning nonprofits into for-profits: New hybrid corporate structures allow nonprofits to accept private investment without diluting their missions. Bloomberg Businessweek, June 15. http://www.businessweek.com/print/smallbiz/content/jun2009/sb20090615_940089.htm. Accessed December 28, 2010.
- van den Heuvel, K. (2010). Making the economy more just. Washington Post, July 21. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/20/AR2010072002754.html?wpisrc=nl_pmopinions. Accessed December 28, 2010.
- Weber, J. (2010). “Impact Investing” Teeters on Edge of Explosive Growth. New York Times, October 10, 31A.Google Scholar