第 1 章
The Corporation's Rebirth: From Profit Machine to Purpose-Driven Entity
In a world where trust in corporations has plummeted to historic lows, Colin Mayer's "Prosperity" arrives as a revolutionary manifesto for reimagining business. Named one of Bill Gates' top reads and praised by CEOs from Unilever to Virgin Group as "the final nail in Milton Friedman's intellectual coffin," this book challenges the dominant shareholder-primacy model that has governed business for half a century. Mayer, an Oxford professor who previously led the Said Business School, doesn't just critique the status quo-he offers a comprehensive blueprint for transforming corporations into engines of broader prosperity. As corporate scandals continue making headlines and environmental crises intensify, Mayer's vision of purpose-driven companies couldn't be more timely or necessary for anyone concerned with building a more sustainable economic future.
第 2 章
The Mindful Corporation: Evolution Through Seven Ages
The modern corporation has undergone a dramatic transformation that reflects fundamental changes in how value is created and measured. Today, intangible assets comprise 85% of US corporate market value, compared to just 20% forty years ago - a seismic shift that has revolutionized business valuation. The millennium marked when investment in intangibles first exceeded tangibles in both the UK and US, signaling a decisive break from industrial-era metrics. This shift is exemplified by companies like WhatsApp, which Facebook purchased for $19 billion despite having minimal physical assets and operating at a loss. Similar examples include Instagram's $1 billion acquisition and LinkedIn's $26.2 billion valuation, demonstrating how intellectual property and network effects have superseded traditional asset-based valuations.
This "mindful corporation" represents the latest in what Mayer identifies as seven distinct corporate ages: the Age of Merchants, the Age of Guilds, the Age of State Corporations, the Age of Joint Stock Companies, the Age of Professional Management, the Age of Shareholder Value, and finally, the Age of the Mindful Corporation. While offering extraordinary efficiency and innovation potential, it also creates troubling concentration of wealth and power. Google's founders, each worth over $40 billion, maintain voting control through dual-class share structures, a practice also adopted by Facebook, Snap, and other tech giants. The corporation has evolved from being rooted in nation-states to becoming "footloose" and "timeless," with increasingly transient ownership prioritizing quarterly returns over long-term societal needs. This transformation has raised serious questions about corporate accountability and social responsibility.
The intellectual history of the corporation is marked by what Mayer calls "benign neglect." Early economists like Adam Smith viewed joint-stock companies with suspicion, famously noting that "negligence and profusion must always prevail" when managing others' money. Even Alfred Marshall, writing in the late 19th century, attributed corporate success merely to the "honesty and uprightness" of English gentlemen rather than analyzing underlying institutional structures. Only in the 1930s did Ronald Coase establish the corporation's legitimate foundation as a lower-cost alternative to marketplace organization through his groundbreaking work on transaction costs.
Economic analysis has remained fixated on the principal-agent problem that concerned Smith-how to prevent managerial negligence or fraud. While shareholder governance rights were the theoretical solution, the reality of dispersed institutional ownership means these rights often go unexercised or are delegated to proxy advisors. After 250 years, we're still struggling with this fundamental governance challenge, with modern "corporate raiders" like activist hedge funds now celebrated as "capitalism's unlikely heroes" for holding management accountable. Recent examples include Engine No. 1's successful campaign against ExxonMobil and Elliott Management's interventions at Twitter and AT&T.
What if we've been asking the wrong questions all along? What if the corporation's true purpose isn't profit maximization but solving problems for people and planet? This paradigm shift suggests a new model of corporate purpose that integrates profitability with social and environmental responsibility, exemplified by benefit corporations like Patagonia and the growing B Corp movement.
第 3 章
The Corporation as a Living Organism: Relationships, Consciousness, Integrity
To understand corporations properly, we must recognize them as more like evolving biological entities than mechanical production systems. Like living organisms, corporations are born, grow, reproduce, mutate, and die. This biological perspective reveals three critical aspects of business often disguised in traditional descriptions: relationships, consciousness, and integrity/morality.
Consider the remarkable symbiosis between microscopic foraminifera cells and algae. By forming a mutually beneficial relationship, both flourished and grew dramatically in size-eventually forming limestone used in the Egyptian pyramids. Similarly, corporations thrive through symbiotic relationships where different parties contribute permanent capital that cannot be withdrawn except upon dissolution.
While economics traditionally emphasizes competition and "survival of the fittest," the significance of cooperation has been underappreciated. The legal form of the corporation creates a structural solution to promote cooperation through deliberate irreversibility. By viewing corporations as living organisms rather than machines, we see that cooperation stems from corporate structure, not just participant conduct. Like biological symbiosis, corporate investors become "trapped in an embrace" where their interests become joint rather than merely mutual, and their focus shifts from individual to collective survival.
Consciousness extends beyond physical components of our brains. Thomas Nagel argues consciousness is our ability to determine relations and principles from our interactions with others, positioning ourselves within a larger cosmos. For corporations, this raises the question of whether their evolution is solely determined by competitive markets or also influenced by consciousness. Corporations accumulate knowledge about their impact on others, developing a conscious appreciation of their influence equivalent to individuals.
This corporate consciousness guides their evolution beyond mere market processes. The emergence of artificial intelligence makes this consideration urgent, as AI may soon become the mind of the corporation, determining corporate purpose and values.
Corporations have two advantages over individuals in achieving value. First, they can bind components together irreversibly, unlike contracts which remain breakable despite costs. Second, they can form relationships individuals cannot establish due to our weak commitment power and integrity. Integrity means being whole, complete, uncorrupted in virtue, and true to commitments.
While deception is intrinsic to humans as self-preservation, corporations can achieve higher or lower levels of integrity than their individual components through organization and structure, either reinforcing self-regarding attitudes or restraining them to promote collective well-being.
第 4 章
The Historical Evolution: From Public Purpose to Private Profit
The corporation represents one of humanity's most significant ideas-not attributable to any single inventor but fundamental to our economic prosperity. It's a legal "person" created by parliaments rather than parents, deriving its name from the Latin corpus (body).
Corporate origins trace to Roman times through two institutions: the societas (partnership) and collegium (corporation). While regular partnerships dissolved upon a partner's death, the societas publicanorum could continue indefinitely, own property, and bind contracts through its partners. These entities raised finance through tradable shares, creating "popular capitalism" two millennia before Margaret Thatcher. The Roman corporation primarily delivered public services, with corporate property being res universitatis-universal property owned by all citizens.
Corporations evolved beyond Rome to shape governance and knowledge. Municipal corporations administered the Roman Empire through self-governing towns. In England, William the Conqueror granted corporate charters to cities like London, a practice later extended to the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Universities emerged as corporations in the 12th-13th centuries when teachers and students formed institutions separate from cathedrals and monasteries.
The Roman Catholic Church unexpectedly advanced corporate law during the 11th-13th centuries. Canon law rejected the requirement for imperial authorization, instead granting corporate rights to alms-houses, hospitals, bishoprics, and the Church itself. Medieval litigation favored corporation members over its head, requiring bishops to consult their chapters when conferring privileges or managing property.
While Western Europe declined after Rome's fall, the Islamic world experienced a Golden Age (7th-13th centuries) built on the mudaraba business partnership. This structure solved Islam's prohibition on interest by allowing profit-sharing between investors and merchants. Despite its advantages, the mudaraba had limitations: designed for short-term ventures with few partners, it wasn't suited for large, long-term projects.
The Dutch East India Company emerged in 1602 through consolidation of trading companies. Its key innovation was retaining members' capital initially for ten years, then making it perpetual in 1623, while allowing share trading. The English East India Company initially operated conventionally, liquidating capital after each voyage, but eventually fused corporation with joint stock to encourage passive investors. By 1654 it adopted perpetual existence and in 1658 fixed capital with transferable shares.
This fusion of corporation and partnership created an intrinsic dilemma. The corporation-essentially a public body-became drawn toward private interests when absorbing commercial affairs. While partnerships had limited social impact due to their small size and duration, corporations had profound ramifications for public matters.
A millennium of business history shows corporations evolving through changing purposes: public works, towns, guilds, learning, church, trading, administration, and finance. The original purpose of corporations was fundamentally public-providing services, administering towns, satisfying spiritual needs, and creating seats of learning. Only in the twentieth century did corporations progressively lose their public purpose as investment concerns increasingly dominated.
第 5 章
Purpose Over Profit: Redefining Corporate Success
Why do companies exist? Not simply to make money for shareholders as the Friedman Doctrine suggests, but to fulfill their purpose-their reason for existing. This fundamental distinction matters deeply because it establishes purpose as an ultimate goal, not merely a means to profit.
The dangerous concept of "doing well by doing good" implies philanthropy is only valuable when profitable, constraining corporate purpose to profit enhancement. Instead, a company's purpose should determine its structure and conduct, which then determines performance measured against that purpose. Companies focusing on authentic purposes are more likely to succeed financially than those fixating on shareholder returns.
What truly drives innovation isn't pursuit of money alone but creating worthwhile endeavors that leave lasting legacies. As Victor Frankl identified, our purpose comes not from what we expect of life but what life expects of us-making a contribution that becomes our legacy. Economics errs by focusing on individualism when purpose derives from community, suggesting work is merely to earn when it's also to contribute, and prioritizing consumption and wealth accumulation when production and disposal matter more.
Corporate governance shouldn't be about enhancing shareholder value, but about promoting corporate purpose. Traditional governance codes like the UK Corporate Governance Code mirror company law by acknowledging stakeholders while prioritizing shareholder interests. This shareholder-centric approach has repeatedly failed during financial crises, with the worst performance coming from companies with supposedly "best governance" practices.
Being a responsible business leader is challenging because money and morals aren't natural companions. The claim that one "does well by doing good" often conflicts with the reality that unethical behavior can be more profitable. As Akerlof and Shiller argue in "Phishing for Phools," markets lack morals, with economic success often achieved through deception and manipulation.
Companies can find profitable opportunities in addressing poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation. Mars Wrigley's Maua program in Nairobi illustrates this approach, expanding distribution into informal settlements through micro-entrepreneurs called "uplifters." The program has grown to engage approximately 450 individuals, generating over $4.5 million-15% of Wrigley's national business.
Four key components drive success: identifying "pain points" in the ecosystem, gaining deep understanding of local challenges, establishing enduring partnerships with relevant organizations in "hybrid value chains," and measuring performance across multiple dimensions including human and social capital. The greatest challenge is internal resistance from middle management who see these approaches as contrary to their financial goals.
第 6 章
Beyond Financial Capital: Measuring What Truly Matters
Performance measurement must account for all forms of capital-not just financial and material, but natural, human, and social capital as well. Einstein reminds us that "many of the things that you can count don't count; many of the things that you can't count really count." Our current accounting systems fail to capture the true costs and benefits of business activities, leading to misallocated resources and unsustainable practices.
Our accounting systems have become the compass of our existence, but they're guiding us toward a precipice by recording activities without properly accounting for their effects on environment and natural capital. Companies record profits while ignoring the destruction they cause-like building in the Amazon rainforest without accounting for ecosystem damage, carbon capture loss, or water table impacts.
The conventional approach to corporate accounting is logically inconsistent in the long run. A company exploiting natural capital, underpaying workers, and destroying local communities may thrive financially for a time but cannot survive indefinitely. It will eventually deplete the finite resources necessary for its existence. A firm's survival depends on maintaining not just physical and financial capital but also natural, human, and social capital.
Current accounting measures profits after subtracting costs of maintaining physical capital (depreciation) but ignores the cost of maintaining other essential capitals. This creates two serious problems: First, companies misallocate resources by pursuing activities that appear profitable but aren't when all costs are properly accounted for-generating "fake" profits rather than "fair" ones. Second, companies distribute profits to shareholders that don't actually exist, because their profits are overstated.
Natural capital's uniqueness lies in its ability to regenerate and sustain itself. Unlike material capital that depletes with use, renewable natural capital magically replenishes itself if not overconsumed. This makes it incredibly valuable, with few other forms of capital having infinite life without depreciation.
The case of Thomas Midgley illustrates this poignantly-his inventions at General Motors (lead in petrol and CFCs) generated substantial profits but caused widespread environmental and health damage that arguably negated any true profit once cleanup costs are considered.
Five fundamental accounting principles need recognition: (1) Companies should record investments in human, natural, and social capital just as they do material capital; (2) These investments should be recorded at cost except when benefits fall short; (3) Maintenance costs for all capital types should be subtracted from profits; (4) Capital valuations should be recorded net of maintenance charges; (5) National accounting should follow equivalent procedures.
第 7 章
Corporate Law as a Creative Force
Law is fundamental to the corporation's existence-it doesn't merely regulate corporations but creates them. The corporation is a legal fiction that would not exist without corporate law, making this area of law uniquely powerful in its creative capacity. Unlike natural persons, corporations are artificial constructs entirely dependent on legal frameworks for their existence, rights, and responsibilities.
Corporate law is defining rather than merely important-it creates the corporation as a legal fiction whose existence is completely dependent on law. While traditionally viewed as establishing rights and rules, corporate law should instead be understood as enabling parties to commit to common purposes. This creative force extends beyond simple regulation to shape organizational structures, determine accountability mechanisms, and establish frameworks for collective action.
Corporate commitments manifest in various forms, from mission statements to stakeholder pledges. While these commitments sound reassuring in company statements, skepticism is warranted since we know corporations primarily serve their own interests. True commitment is an obligation to abide by statements or principles that aren't legally enforceable. Commitments can be self-regarding (benefiting the provider by encouraging investment and building trust), communal (benefiting communities connected to the corporation through job creation and local development), or social (extending beyond immediate stakeholders to society generally through environmental stewardship or ethical business practices).
The corporation's existence derives from law, which establishes it as an entity distinct from individuals and defines its boundaries. Corporate law determines permissible forms, ownership structures, control mechanisms, and responsibilities of parties-essentially creating the corporate genome. One crucial characteristic determined by law is the corporation's ability to commit to its purpose. This legal framework enables everything from raising capital to entering contracts, while simultaneously establishing limitations and obligations.
The transformation from possibility to reality occurs through ownership and governance structures. Long-term owners provide credible commitments that short-term owners cannot, as demonstrated by family-owned businesses that maintain multi-generational perspectives. Corporate governance requires three essential components: articulation of values (clear statement of principles and objectives), accountability for liabilities (mechanisms to ensure follow-through), and attribution of responsibility (specific assignment of duties and consequences). Without precision in articulation, accounting for implementation, and allocation of responsibility, corporate statements are vacuous. With them, they become powerful binding commitments with consequences for profitability and individual careers.
Industrial foundations like Bertelsmann, Bosch, Carlsberg, Ikea, and Tata demonstrate this approach effectively. Despite being essentially ownerless with self-appointing boards, their performance has been remarkably good, likely because employees value contributing to organizations with public purposes alongside private ones. These foundations combine commercial success with social responsibility, often outperforming conventional corporations in both financial and social metrics.
Europe illustrates various forms of corporate commitment through distinct national approaches. The UK, with dispersed ownership and short-term shareholders, represents a low-commitment economy offering flexibility but less stability. This model prioritizes market efficiency but may sacrifice long-term planning and stakeholder interests. Nordic countries, with family-controlled long-term ownership, sustain self-regarding commitments through generational perspectives and stable ownership structures. Central European nations like Austria and Germany confer rights on stakeholders, particularly employees, through workers councils and co-determination, enabling communal commitments. This model has proven particularly resilient during economic downturns and effective at balancing various stakeholder interests.
第 8 章
Reimagining Finance and Investment for Purpose
The financial crisis revealed fundamental problems in corporate financing, particularly in Europe, leading to investment declines and funding deficiencies. Companies with high leverage, especially long-term debt, cut investment most severely after the crisis. While long-term finance is typically considered essential for investment, it became a burden during financial distress-a one-year debt is a millstone, but a ten-year debt becomes a noose.
Evidence contradicts conventional wisdom about bank governance-institutions with the "best" corporate governance arrangements by traditional measures actually failed most during the financial crisis. In highly leveraged institutions, fundamental conflicts exist between shareholders and creditors, with shareholders benefiting from upside gains while creditors bear downside losses.
Handelsbanken's success comes not through centralized risk management but through delegation. Their approach hinges on two principles: carefully selecting trustworthy people and instilling a strong common culture around the bank's purpose and values. This mirrors how successful organizations and families operate-educating and establishing purpose, then allowing autonomy.
Corporate tax systems universally distort financing decisions by allowing interest deductions on debt but not dividend payments on equity. This debt preference originated as a temporary measure during WWI but became permanent, creating debt addiction in both corporate and financial sectors. Studies of tax reforms in Italy and Belgium that equalized treatment of debt and equity show that banks not only improved their own capital ratios but also increased lending to firms.
Financial capital, once the major constraint on corporate investment, now exists in abundance. While maximizing return on equity makes sense when capital must be rationed, today's world is awash with financial capital seeking profitable opportunities. The true scarcities of the twenty-first century are human, social, and natural capital-skilled labor, community trust, and clean environments. Shareholders' historical position as the dominant controllers of companies has become an anachronism.
Infrastructure investment shouldn't merely fill gaps but envision complete systems needed for the next decades. The pragmatic approach of adding bits incrementally often degenerates into crisis management, with investments coming only after systems have deteriorated to decrepit states. An economic approach must consider what airport systems, energy networks, broadband, water supply, and transportation networks an economy needs over the next fifty years.
Infrastructure programs typically involve three distinct phases-design, build, and operate-each with unique financing requirements and risks that necessitate different public-private arrangements. The entire lifecycle spans decades: design (2-8 years), building (3-7 years), and operations (20+ years). Since no entity can credibly commit for this duration, programs must be disaggregated by phase.
第 9 章
A New Paradigm: The Trusted Corporation
Samuel Huntington's analysis of clashing civilizations overlooked corporations as both cause of and solution to civilizational conflict and breakdowns of trust. Our journey through corporate history reveals how corporations evolved from public-function entities to profit-maximizing machines. The corporation isn't merely a profit generator but a living entity capable of consciousness about its environment and potential contributions.
Purpose defines why corporations exist and what they aspire to become, determining everything from ownership and governance to performance in producing profitable solutions to human and planetary problems. The remarkable diversity of corporate forms across time and geography demonstrates various approaches to managing inherent conflicts between owners, managers, shareholders, stakeholders, and communities.
As capital scarcity shifts from financial to human, intellectual, and social capitals, governance must adapt from shareholder control to trusteeship for multiple parties, requiring commitment rather than control. Corporate law should facilitate this by requiring companies to articulate their purposes in their articles of association and demonstrate how their structures uphold these purposes, transforming the entire corporate sector.
The conventional separation between finance and investment has damaged corporate sectors, while infrastructure suffers from commitment failures between governments and private providers. The traditional view drawing sharp boundaries around firms and separating commercial from social aspects has failed to recognize that business should internalize externalities for mutual benefit.
We need to release corporations from shareholder supremacy and embrace diverse corporate forms that serve collective interests. This paradigm shift will inspire new educational approaches that question corporate purpose rather than assuming shareholder value maximization. The choice is between utility-seeking profit maximizers restrained by regulation, or purpose-pursuing companies enabled by law and partnering with government for public and private good.
Trust in corporations has collapsed across multiple dimensions-from fair compensation and taxation to environmental stewardship and labor practices. Restoring this trust isn't merely about economic efficiency but essential for our survival in an uncertain world. The modern corporation has become "inhumane" by removing humans from its center and replacing them with anonymous markets and shareholders. This represents a dangerous imbalance where the humanities have been systematically removed from economics and business, breaking Adam Smith's careful balance between markets in "Wealth of Nations" and morality in "Theory of Moral Sentiments."
Restoring trust is urgent because without it, economic systems will continue collapsing, financial systems failing, and environmental degradation accelerating. A trusted corporation is ultimately a commercially successful one, and national competitiveness depends on corporate trustworthiness.
