Assessing the Accountability of the Benefit Corporation: Will This New Gray Sector Organization Enhance Corporate Social Responsibility?

Journal of Business Ethics

Volumn 110, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 133-150

  André, Rae ^a  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; B corporation; Benefit corporation; Government sponsored enterprise; Gray sector organization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866502263     PISSN: 01674544     EISSN: 15730697     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1254-1     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Adams, S. (2010). Capitalist monkey wrench: Can a new corporate structure get companies to do good by not always putting shareholders first? Forbes Magazine, April 12. http://Forbes. com. Accessed November 15, 2010.
2. André, R. (2010). Assessing the accountability of government sponsored enterprises and Quangos. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 271-289.
3. Archibald, T. (2007). A new kind of company. Inc, 29(7), 23-24.
4. B Corporation. (2009). B Corporation Annual Report. http://www. bcorporation. net/index. cfm/fuseaction/content. page/nodeID/dec9e60f-392c-4207-8538-be73be69cf85/externalURL//. Accessed February 8, 2011.
5. B Corporation. (2011). Benefit corporation legislation. http://www. bcorporation. net/publicpolicy. Accessed October 4, 2011.
6. B Corporation. (2011). Make it official. http://www. bcorporation. net/become0/official. Accessed February 8, 2011.
7. B Corporation Directory. (2011). http://www. bcorporation. net/community/search. Accessed February 10, 2011.
8. B Impact Assessment. (2010). Version 2. 0, Sector: Manufacturing, Employees: 30+ http://www. bcorporation. net/resources/bcorp/documents/2010-B-Impact-Assessment%20(1). pdf. Accessed February 8, 2011.
9. Birrell, D. (2008). Devolution and Quangos in the United Kingdom: The implementation of principles and policies for rationalisation and democratisation. Policy Studies, 29(1), 35-49.
10. Blair, M., & Stout, L. (2006). Specific investment: Explaining anomalies in corporate law. Journal of Corporation Law, 31(3), 719-744.
11. Bochel, C., & Bochel, H. (2004). The UK social policy process. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
12. Brummer, J. J. (1991). Corporate responsibility and legitimacy: An interdisciplinary analysis. New York: Greenwood Press.
13. Business Associations Committee of the Section on Business Law of the Pennsylvania Bar Association: undated, 'Amendments to the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes with Official Source Notes and Committee Comments'. www. bcorporation. net/resources/bcorp/.../Draft_Pennsylvania-Legislation. pdf. Accessed February 20. 2011.
14. Cashore, B. (2002). Legitimacy and the privatization of environmental governance: How Non-State Market-Driven (NSMD) governance systems gain rule-making authority. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 15(4), 503-529.
15. City of Philadelphia. (2009). Bill No. 090119-A, An ordinance amending chapter 19-2600 of the Philadelphia Code, entitled "Business Privilege Taxes".
16. Clapp, J. (1998). The privatization of global environmental governance: ISO 14000 and the developing world. Environmental Governance, 4, 295-316.
17. Connor, P. E. (1980). Organizations: Theory and design. Chicago, IL: Science Research Associates.
18. Coppock, R., & Dierkes, M. (1973). Corporate responsibility does not depend on public pressure. Business and Society Review/Innovation, 6, 82-89.
19. Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Citizenship ecologies and the corporation: Examining the relevance of ecological citizenship for redefining corporate responsibilities. Organization & Environment, 21(4), 371-389.
20. Cutler, C., Haufler, V., & Porter, T. (Eds.). (1999). Private authority in international politics. New York: SUNY Press.
21. Dembosky, A. (2010). Protecting companies that mix profitability, values. National Public Radio, March 9. http://npr. org/templates/story/story. php?storyId=124468487. Accessed September 7, 2010.
22. Denison, D. R. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness. New York: Wiley.
23. Donlan, T. G. (2009). Engines of destruction: Following the impulse that led Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disaster. Barron's, December 21, 51.
24. Dyer, W. G. (1982). Patterns and assumptions: The keys to understanding organizational culture. Office of Naval Research Technical Report TR-ONR-7.
25. Freeman, I., & Hasnaoui, A. (2011). The meaning of corporate social responsibility: The vision of four nations. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 419-443.
26. Greve, C. (1999). Quangos in Denmark and Scandinavia: Trends, problems and perspectives. In M. V. Flinders & M. J. Smith (Eds.), Quangos, accountability, and reform: The politics of quasi-government (pp. 83-108). Basingstoke, UK): Macmillan Press.
27. Haufler, V. (2001). A public role for the private sector: Industry self-regulation in a global economy. Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
28. Hays, C. L. (2000). Ben & Jerry's to Unilever, with attitude. The New York Times, April 13. http://nytimes. com/2000/04/13/business/ben-jerry-s-to-unilever. Accessed September 7, 2010.
29. Herman, R. D., & Renz, D. O. (2008). Advancing nonprofit organizational effectiveness research and theory. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 18(4), 399-415.
30. Hogarty, R. A. (2002). The paradox of public authorities in Massachusetts: Massport and Masspike. New England Journal of Public Policy, 17, 19-37.
31. http://Fourthsector. net. Accessed October 2, 2011.
32. Jones, A. (2001). Social responsibility and the utilities. Journal of Business Ethics, 34, 219-229.
33. Koppell, J. G. S. (2003). The politics of quasi-government: Hybrid organizations and the dynamics of bureaucratic control. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York: Free Press.
35. Lee, I. (2009). Citizenship and the corporation. Law and Social Inquiry, 34(1), 129-168.
36. Maryland General Assembly. (2010). Session, department of legislative services: 2010, 'Fiscal and Policy Note, House Bill 1009'.
37. Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). "Implicit" and "explicit" CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404-424.
38. Meidinger, E. (2001). Environmental certification programs and US environmental law: Closer than you may think. Environmental Law Reporter, 31, 10162-10179.
39. Messner, M. (2009). The limits of accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34, 918-938.
40. Mickels, A. (2009). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Reconciling the ideals of a for-benefit corporation with director fiduciary duties in the U. S. and Europe. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 32(1), 271.
41. Moe, R. C. (1979). Government corporations and the erosion of accountability: The case of the proposed energy security corporation. Public Administration Review, 39, 566-571.
42. Moe, R. C. (2001). The emerging federal quasi government: Issues of management and accountability. Public Administration Review, 61, 290-312.
43. Moe, R. C., & Kosar, K. R. (2005). The quasi government: Hybrid organizations with both government and private sector legal characteristics. Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, May 18.
44. Palmås, K. (2005). The UK public interest company: The idea, its origins, and its relevance for Sweden. A report commissioned by the Swedish National Audit Office.
45. Pennsylvania Bar Association. (2010). Amendments to the Pennsylvania consolidated statutes with official source notes and committee comments.
46. Perry, J., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public-private distinction in organizational theory. Academy of Management Review, 13, 182-201.
47. Purssell, A. (1999). Local government and the unelected state. In M. V. Flinders & M. J. Smith (Eds.), Quangos, accountability and reform (pp. 132-143). New York: St. Martin's Press.
48. Richter, U. (2010). Liberal thought in reasoning on CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 625-649.
49. Schreck, P. (2011). Reviewing the business case for corporate social responsibility: New evidence and analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(2), 167-188.
50. Senate of California. (2011). S. 201, introduced February 8 by Senator DeSaulnier.
51. Senate of Maryland. (2010). S. 690, Chapter 97, (enacted).
52. Senate of New Jersey. (2010). S. 2170, 214th Legislature, (introduced).
53. Senate of New York. (2010). S. 7855, Calendar 72, (passed Senate).
54. Senate of Vermont. (2010). S. 263, Sec. 1. 11A V. S. A. chapter 21, (enacted).
55. Skelcher, C. (1998). The appointed state: Quasi-governmental organizations and democracy. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
56. Social Capital Markets. (2010). http://socialcapitalmarkets. net/about-socap/. Accessed January 4, 2010.
57. Social Capital Markets: At the Intersection of Money and Meaning. (2010). http://socialcapitalmarkets. net/about-socap/. Accessed December 28, 2010.
58. Stanton, T. H. (2002). Government-sponsored enterprises: Mercantilist companies in the modern world. Washington DC: AEI Press.
59. State of Maryland. (2010). Laws of Maryland.
60. State of Maryland, Maryland General Assembly. (2010). House Bill 1009, Corporations-Benefit Corporation.
61. State of New Jersey, 214th Legislature. (2010). Senate, No. 2170, July 1.
62. State of Vermont. (2010). No. 113: An act relating to the Vermont Benefit Corporations Act.
63. Stout, L. A. (2008). Why we should stop teaching Dodge v. Ford. Virginia Law & Business Review, 3(1), 163-176.
64. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571-610.
65. The Economist. (2009). Capital markets with a conscience: social investing grows up. The Economist, September 1. http://www. economist. com/node/14347606. Accessed December 28, 2010.
66. The Economist. (2010). Social innovation: Let's hear those ideas. The Economist August 12, 2010. http://www. economist. com/node/16789766?story_id=16789766. Accessed November 15, 2010.
67. Tozzi, J. (2009). Turning nonprofits into for-profits: New hybrid corporate structures allow nonprofits to accept private investment without diluting their missions. Bloomberg Businessweek, June 15. http://www. businessweek. com/print/smallbiz/content/jun2009/sb20090615_940089. htm. Accessed December 28, 2010.
68. Turnbull, S. (1995). Innovations in corporate governance: The Mondragon experience. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 3(3), 167-180.
69. van den Heuvel, K. (2010). Making the economy more just. Washington Post, July 21. http://www. washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/20/AR2010072002754. html?wpisrc=nl_pmopinions. Accessed December 28, 2010.
70. Waddock, S. (2004). Parallel universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1), 5-42.
71. Waddock, S., & Mcintosh, M. (2011). Business unusual: Corporate responsibility in a 2. 0 world. Business and Society Review, 116(3), 303-330.
72. Weber, J. (2010). "Impact Investing" Teeters on Edge of Explosive Growth. New York Times, October 10, 31A.
73. Zattoni, A. (2011). Who should control a corporation? Toward a contingency stakeholder model for allocating ownership rights. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(2), 255-274.