The constituents of corporate responsibility: Separate, but not separable, interests?

Abstract

Corporations should consider societal expenses as they consider R&D and advertising: risky, long-term expenses that are absolutely essential to the health of the firm. I I n his r ecen t -and splendid--Lonely Hearts of the Cosmos, Dennis Overbye observed that it is the of interests that leads to the sawdust of progress. Although he addressed this comment to the history of cosmological inquiry, we have taken the liberty (with apologies to Mr. Overbye) of citing his work out of his context because we fervently believe in its application here. We take a second liberty, then, and presume to modify his insight for our specific use in this forum: It is the grinding of separate, but not necessarily separable, interests that leads to the sawdust of progress when addressing issues of corporate social responsibility. We argue that the interests of corporate constituencies that give rise to questions on the order of To Whom is the Corporation Responsible? are often separate, but they are not separable. This article, then, is organized into several sections that address this issue. First, we openly admit our guilt for providing a ~'hook, designed to pique the curiosity of those with interests in this area. Second, we present an overview of the allocative problem. Third, we provide some collaborative strategies by which corporations may attend simultaneously to the preferences of separate constituencies. Finally, we revisit the hook, as a dilemma all corporations increasingly face in responsibly attending to shareholder interests while simultaneously benefiting society.