>Why couldn't an honest commitment to act ethically help the bottom line? Well if it did you'd think corporations would act ethically, whereas reality says oth

>Why couldn't an honest commitment to act ethically help the bottom line? Well if it did you'd think corporations would act ethically, whereas reality says otherwise and they don't unless forced by government or public pressure. The world's totally fucked right now because of corporate greed. Every day I read a new story about how some corporation is acting completely and utterly unethically. It https://www.hoover.org/research/what-purpose-corporation https://www.hoover.org/research/what-purpose-corporation >There are two levels of corporate duties to shareholders. First, corporate boards and officers deal at arm’s length with outsiders, and here, their responsibility is governed by the so-called business judgment rule, which protects them against suits by shareholders so long as they follow appropriate procedures in reaching a decision and act in good faith to maximize shareholder value. This rule both constrains corporate insiders but also protects them from liability if their good faith efforts turn out less well financially than expected. Indeed, if officers had to make good on every loss that occurs when deals go sour, no one would take on such roles. And second, whenever corporate officials enter into any kind of self-dealing transaction, the standard of care is much higher, given the conflict of interest. For such transactions, insiders must analyze whether corporate shareholders received “fair value” from the transaction.