That's not the point I'm trying to make. I agree that it's not the only purpose, and even if it was I don't think that's bad per se. You could also see it as fu

That's not the point I'm trying to make. I agree that it's not the only purpose, and even if it was I don't think that's bad per se. You could also see it as fulfilling a purpose to make money, they often go together, it's probably the ideal situation. My point is; As long as making money and their values align it's all good, but if decisions need to be made that present a choice between values and profit/growth it becomes very hard to choose for values. Especially once a company goes public, gets acquired, or needs significant investment, it might not even have the option to live by its values. That's why I think values are only real/true if they align with profit/growth. Similar to what the article describes; what do they really mean? How much impact do they really have? How much of it is PR? What it comes down to imo is; Is there willingness to sacrifice growth and revenue for values? I'd say in most cases the answer to that is no, and I would much prefer it if companies are just clear and honest about that. If you do count other forms of companies, like not-for-profits, then it's a totally different story of course.