Glaeser: Can Businesses Do Well and Do Good?

I’ve been meaning to reblog this for a while:

The question of creative capitalism is whether there is some role for institutions that falls between traditional profit-making and nonprofit firms. Is the world being well served with these two clearly distinguished types of entities, one of which serves only shareholders and the other of which has some other goal? Does it make sense to consider hybrid organizations that have an obligation to earn financial returns, for some of their investors, and social returns for others? In a sense, the world has long had such hybrids in the form of profit-making subsidiaries of philanthropies and companies, like Ikea, that are owned by foundations.

Such hybrids will always be messy and may end up being unworkable. Perhaps the Friedman-Posner-Summers distaste for them is correct.

One thought on “Glaeser: Can Businesses Do Well and Do Good?

  1. I use the term “social entrepreneurship” tro impress people and to get funding for projects. Usually, I target wealthy people or people connected to wealthy concerns so that I can get next to the money and steal them blind. But I am reformed now. I have stopped using heroin for the past 30 days, and I have stopped seeing that woman behind my wife’s back. Its wrong to lie about things and trick people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>