Critical Perspectives on Management and Organisation - Essay Example

The Corporation The Corporation is a documentary by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott which attempts to show the psychopathic manner in which modern corporations behave in a bid to make profits. It is a documentary which is designed to show the evils which have been brought about by corporations all over the world as well as providing a psychological analysis of the way these entities behave like psychopaths. The psychopathology of corporations is depicted as being as a result of their not having souls or human feelings which ensures that they do not have the capability of ensuring that they take responsibility for their actions. Achbar and Abbott argue that modern corporations have essentially become profit making organisations and have no regard for the either the welfare of individuals or the adverse effects that their activities might have either to local populations or the environments which are destroyed as a result. Corporations are entities which, despite being considered persons by law, display psychopathic symptoms and this characteristic can hardly be remedied considering that they are not treated in the same way as other persons under the law. An argument that is made in the documentary is that corporations tend to display characteristics that are associated with psychopaths. This argument can be considered to be pertinent considering that a considerable number of corporations in the world today tend to disregard the welfare of communities as well as the environment in areas where they have operations in their bid to make profits (Mito and Sakurada 2003, p.219). The main aim of corporations in the modern world is to make profits and this endeavour is often accomplished at all possible costs. For most corporations, being fined by governments is of lesser value than achieving high profits because fines are often only a portion of the profits that are made over a certain period. Furthermore, there are instances where corporations take part in extremely ruthless actions, such as murder or genocide, in a bid to ensure that they not only make a profit, but also have a presence in an area of interest for as long as possible without interruptions which might be brought about through issues of legal ownership of land and resources. One would agree with Achbar and Abbott that corporations are entities which, as a result of their psychopathic nature, are unable to have human feelings and emotions and are instead only focused on themselves and how they can maximise their positions of advantage in order to ensure that they are able to achieve their goals. The ruthless manner through which corporations conduct their activities are symptoms of their psychopathic nature and this is often manifested through the way that they might choose to cooperate with any form of government, whether autocratic or democratic, in order to make profits (Tilly and Galván 2006, p.61). In the documentary, Achbar and Abbott raise the issue of American corporations working with Nazi Germany in the latter’s activities so that they could be able to maximise on the situation and make massive profits. During the Nazi period in Germany, most corporations in the Western world were encouraged by their governments to desist from conducting their activities in this country. However, corporations such as Coca Cola and IBM continued with their activities in Nazi Germany through their subsidiaries, which ensured that they had a foothold in what must have been considered a lucrative market at the time. Through these subsidiaries, these two corporations, among others, were able to take advantage of the situation to increase their profits because a significant number of their rivals were not present in the market. It did not matter to them that they were cooperating with a brutal and genocidal regime as long as they were able to maximise their share in the market and ensure that their activities continued uninterrupted. However, while Achbar and Abbott’s documentary can be considered revealing concerning the true nature of corporations, it fails to show the manner through which these entities have come to display the psychopathic characteristics that are attributed to them. One would suggest that despite this documentary following the legal line and treating corporations as individuals, for the most part, this stance can be considered inaccurate because corporations in the modern world do not have to undergo the same treatment under the law like persons (Barros 2014, p.1211). Most corporations in the world today tend to undertake actions which no other individual n society would have been capable of without serious consequences. Even psychopaths in society tend to be governed by laws which are enforced whenever these individuals are found to have committed crimes. The latter are either fined, given prison sentences, or executed if they are found guilty of charges brought against them; a circumstance which does not apply to modern corporations. Corporations can, for the most part, get away with almost anything that they do because these entities, despite being recognised as persons under the law, are essentially non-living things whose main purpose is to fulfil the objectives for which they were created. Therefore, while they might behave like psychopaths, it should be noted that corporations do no derive pleasure from their actions because they do not have the capability of doing so, in the same manner as a human psychopath would. Instead, the aim of corporations is to make profits and this is done in such a way as to ensure that profits are made while at the same time protecting the interests of these entities from any form of repercussions that might result; especially if their activities are illegal (Djelic 2013, p.595). These entities tend not to be judged according to the same laws that apply to persons and they instead use the massive influence that they have over governments to ensure that most forms of legal action against them are either dismissed or are settled out of court. Therefore, through their influence over governments, corporations can be considered to be at most times above the law because they are able to conduct their activities in the most ruthless manner possible, even leading to the loss of life and the destruction of the environment, yet do not get any serious punishment except for fines which are quite insignificant considering the massive profits that they make. The main aim of corporations is always to ensure that they make profits and all actions that they undertake, however benign seeming, is for the achievement of this objective. As depicted in the documentary, most corporations have come to embrace the concept of corporate social responsibility and this has been done in a bid to ensure that their image is sanitised (van Aaken, Splitter & Seidl 2013, p.350). Corporations have over the past few decades developed an extremely negative reputation within the public and this has led to a situation where in some instances, some of their products have been boycotted. In order to ensure that they not only continue with their activities with minimal consequences as well as recover the market that they may have lost as a result of their unsavoury reputations, most corporations have embraced corporate social responsibility as a means of improving their reputations in the public eye. It is through getting involved in social responsibility projects that corporations attempt to show a human part to their activities but while this may be the case, one would suggest that it is done in the ultimate bid to continue making profits. The increasing public awareness of environmental and human issues has led to a situation where corporations have to undertake actions designed to align themselves to these issues because this is the only way through which they can ensure their survival in the modern world. One would argue that corporations have been designed to be highly effective in making profit and this creates a situation where they are unable to function in the same manner as persons. The need to ensure absolute profit means that there can be no space for sentimentality, essentially making these corporations behaves in extremely ruthless ways in order to achieve their objectives (Hayek 1944, p.5). Through the ruthless manner in which they conduct their activities, most corporations have been able to ensure that they maximise their profits to the highest levels possible. The ruthless characteristic of corporations can be attributed to the way that they choose to disregard the interests of others when conducting their operations all over the world and one might speculate that corporations might be among the biggest contributors to environmental degradation in world history (Morrissette and Borer 2004, p.86). The activities of these entities can be considered to be the means through which they have been able to acquire such an influence not only among their home governments, but also on outside ones as well. The result of such influence is that corporations have developed the ability, using all means necessary including paying government officials, to ensure that their interests in different areas are protected. Thus, corporations have been able to control the decision making processes of some governments to such an extent that the latter have chosen to go against the interests of their people in order to cater for corporations’ interests. The psychopathic nature of corporations can be attributed to the highly competitive nature of the capitalist system which has essentially dehumanised economic activity. This has forced corporations to seek any means necessary to ensure that they increase their influence as well as making sure that they keep their rivals away from their areas of influence. The highly competitive economic environment has led to a situation where corporations are willing to do anything in order to win (Yeatts et al. 2012 p.632). The intense competition has made it nearly impossible for these entities to behave in a considerate way; making them more psychopathic in nature as most of them have continued in their destructive ways. As a result of their psychopathic nature, corporations are entities which do not seem to have principles and this is seen mainly through their willingness to cooperate with psychopathic, authoritarian, or totalitarian governments in order to make possible the continuation of their operations with as little interference as possible. The result is that despite the international norms of democracy and human rights being in place, most corporations often disregard them and continue their activities as usual in countries that do not appreciate these norms; at times even going as far as supporting autocratic regimes to suppress the voice of their people. The size of corporations as well as their wealth has allowed them to have unprecedented influence over the governments all over the world and this has ensured that they are able to conduct their activities without any fear of consequences. In ways that can only be considered psychopathic, corporations have come to use their influence for the purpose of ensuring that their interests are protected against any infringement by governments or laws that might hamper their activities (Bertrand et al. 2014, p.882). In order to achieve this objective, corporations have become reliant on the corruption of elites, especially in the developing world, through the payment of bribes and using various forms of intimidation to ensure that these individuals are compliant with their wishes. In this way, corporations have become major players in the economies of developing countries; creating economic conditions which are favourable to them as opposed to the citizens of these countries. The massive influence wielded by these entities has allowed for the development of governmental systems which seek only to support their interests and in some cases, corporations have been known to organise and stage coups against those governments that seem not to toe the line (Huntington 1996, pp.183). The willingness of some corporations to get directly involved in the affairs of other countries, even though these actions might be detrimental to the welfare of their people, shows that corporations do not have the capability to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions beyond those involving their own interests. The main purpose of corporations is to put the interests of their shareholders first while at the same time ensure that their influence continues to expand. These objectives have made these entities to become single-minded in the fulfilment of their purpose and have created a situation where it is increasingly becoming difficult for them to be brought under control. The ruthless and, it can be argued, evil nature of these corporations can be considered to come as a result of their need to fulfil their objectives rather than the nature of the individuals who work within them (Solinger 2002, p.210). The people who work within these entities, from their CEOs to the lowest level of employees are normal individuals who have the same feelings and expectations as any other people. However, in their bid to fulfil the obligations that have been laid on them as a result of working within corporations, they find it essential to ensure that the latter’s objectives are fulfilled. Therefore, through doing their jobs, these individuals end up helping in the development of the monstrosities that are corporations. Not only do these entities end up causing harm to a majority of the population that uses their products, but they do not take responsibility for these actions, leaving the people affected to ensure that they deal with the problems caused by corporations. The nature and actions of corporations has brought about a situation where there is need to ensure that new arrangements are made for organising economic activities. An ideal economic situation in the world would be one where the influence of corporations is reduced to such an extent that they do not interfere in the activities of governments. Instead, such an economy would be based on fair trade where governments and businesses are free to make choices about the services to secure and not to secure without the interference of big decision makers such as the top people in government, banks, and other international institutions (Norberg 2001, p.37). Free trade without the influence of corporations and financial institutions in the decision making process would ensure that there are equal economic activities all over the world and these would be conducted in such a manner that it would ensure that there are few conflict of interest between the individuals or entities involved. Free trade should be fair because it is the only means to ensure that the influence of corporations is removed and a more constructive relationship between governments, businesses, and their people is developed. A new economic arrangement should involve businesses, especially corporations, having to take responsibility for all harm that they cause to customers and they should be capable of paying for any damages or medical expenses incurred by these individuals (Zakaria 2008, p.172). Fair trade should be expanded from only being applied to organic products to being also applied to all other products because this is the only way through which individuals at all levels of trade will be able to profit at a more or less equal level. Furthermore, rules should be set to govern corporations and this in such a way that once they fulfil the objectives for which they were formed, they should be dissolved because this is the only way through which the rest of the world will come to be protected against these entities. The discussion above, based on the documentary The Corporation, shows that corporations are entities which display psychopathic characteristics which can hardly be remedied considering that they are not treated in the same way as other persons under the law. One argument that has been made in the documentary is that corporations tend to display characteristics that are associated with psychopaths. Furthermore, the ruthless ways through which corporations conduct their activities are symptoms of their psychopathic nature. Moreover, corporations can, for the most part, get away with almost anything that they do because these entities, despite being recognised as persons under the law are non-living things. The main aim of corporations is always to ensure that they make profits and all actions that they undertake, however benign seeming, is for the achievement of this objective. Thus, it is argued that corporations have been designed to be highly effective in making profit and this creates a situation where they are unable to function in the same manner as persons. In addition, the psychopathic nature of corporations has been attributed to the highly competitive nature of the capitalist system which has essentially dehumanised economic activity. The size of corporations as well as their wealth has allowed them to have unprecedented influence over the governments all over the world and this has ensured that they are able to conduct their activities without any fear of consequences. It has been found that the main purpose of corporations is to put the interests of their shareholders first while at the same time ensure that their influence continues to expand. Furthermore, the nature and actions of corporations has brought about a situation where there is need to ensure that new arrangements are made for organising economic activities. Finally, an alternative form of economic activity is free trade, which the only means to ensure that the influence of corporations is removed and a more constructive relationship between governments, businesses, and their people is developed. References Barros, M., 2014. “Tools of Legitimacy: The Case of the Petrobras Corporate Blog,” Organization Studies, 35, pp.1211-1230. Bertrand, O., Lumineau, F., & Fedorova, E. 2014, “The Supportive Factors of Firms’ Collusive Behavior: Empirical Evidence from Cartels in the European Union.” Organization Studies, 35(6): 881-908. Djelic, M.L., 2013. “When Limited Liability was (Still) an Issue: Mobilization and Politics of Signification in 19th-Century England,” Organization Studies, 34 (5-6): 595-621. Hayek, F., 1944. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Huntington, S.P., 1996. The Clash of Civilizations. New York, Simon and Schuster. Mito, T., & Sakurada, D., 2003. State power and multinational oil corporations: The political economy of market intervention in Canada and Japan. International Journal, 58(2), pp.219-220. Morrissette, J. J., & Borer, D.A., 2004. “Where oil and water do mix: Environmental scarcity and future conflict in the Middle East and North Africa. Parameters, 34(4), pp.86-101. Norberg, J., 2001. In Defense of Global Capitalism. Stockholm: Timbro. Solinger, D.J., 2002. “Chinas workers under assault: The exploitation of labor in a globalizing economy.” The Journal of Asian Studies, 61(1): 209-211. The Corporation. (2003). Achbar, M. & Abbott, J. (Dir). Canada: Zeitgeist Films. Tilly, C. & Galván, J.L. 2006, "Lousy Jobs, Invisible Unions: The Mexican Retail Sector in the Age of Globalization", International Labor and Working Class History, 70(1): 61-85. van Aaken, D., Splitter,V. & Seidl, D. 2013, “Why do corporate actors engage in pro-social behaviour? A Bourdieusian perspective on corporate social responsibility,” Organization, 20(3): 349-371. Yeatts, K. B., El-Sadig, M., Ali, H. I., Al-Maskari, F., Campbell, A., Ng, S. W., Olshan, A. F. 2012, “Conducting environmental health research in the Arabian middle east: Lessons learned and opportunities. Environmental Health Perspectives, 120(5): 632-6. Zakaria, F. 2008. The Post-American World. New York, W.W.W. Norton & Company. Read More