Will Shareholders Vote for the Double Bottom Line?

The Chronicle of Philanthropy's Peter Panepento produces an excellent daily update of blog highlights called Give and Take that folks regularly forward to me. Yesterday, it referenced my recent post on Fortune's expanding coverage of social change

Jeremy Gregg wrote in to The Chronicle to make some great points I want to pass along:

I think that any discussion about the role of social values, rather than simply a pure focus on the bottom line, is a good sign for our sector. The risk, of course, is that these discussions are really just extensions of complex marketing programs aimed at “cause conscious consumers.”

However, the emergence of this trend comes at a time when a record number of people are working in the “social sector,” and at a time when we are seeing an unprecedented number of charities being created. The confluence of these trends cannot be pure happenstance: rather, I truly believe that our society is beginning to realize that a socially conscious business is actually a more sustainable enterprise that can achieve longer term success than a business that is purely focused on the financial returns.

Of course, discussions in Forbes are one thing. The true sign of change will be when shareholders begin to voice their opinions in favor of social objectives rather than short-term financial returns. I believe that we are yet a long way from that.

I do want to note that most of the activity I am referring to is not within publicly-owned companies which, I agree, are likely to make the slowest movement (with motives likely to be much more complicated.) I am talking about what is emerging from small business owners, many of whom are already very wealthy, and what they can achieve when they publicly commit to balancing both bottom lines.

Will Shareholders Vote for the Double Bottom Line?

Susan Herr