Business Pledge for Good
When Nada and I read this Economist story about Harvard Business School graduates pledging to act with integrity, our first reaction was one of cynicism. It’s all very well to get students to pledge to “serve the greater good” and “act with the utmost integrity,” but making these anything other than platitudes is difficult.
The question is: has Harvard Business School identified what that greater good is, or is the pledge just window dressing? The pledge, whether spearheaded by students or faculty, will only work if the school’s syllabus is adjusted to place greater emphasis on CSR and sustainability. Harvard would need to teach that responsibility has to be embedded in the balance sheet, and that open, transparent and continuous reporting will translate into long-term profitability.
In addition to teaching greater responsibility, Harvard would also have to extend the level of critical theory thinking in its curriculum, teaching students how to critique an organisation, so that once they are employed they can critically analyse and bring a level of sharp dialogue to the organisation that hires them. Changing the syllabus would show meaningful commitment to the pledge and to pushing the greater good into organisations. If Harvard formally supported the pledge but did not change its syllabus, leaving it up to individuals to pledge on their own, the pledge’s meaning and gravitas would be lost.
When people have become embroiled in bribery and corruption scandals or strategic misunderstandings, they often believe that they are inherently good but have had to operate in difficult or complicated circumstances. Harvard and other business schools need to change their emphasis from training independent individuals in leadership to preparing them to be able to create sustainable organisations.
However, I believe that Harvard won’t change its curriculum to support the pledge, because it might make businesses less interested in people with Harvard MBAs. Businesses don’t want employees to challenge the status quo; this new Harvard training would make employees more critical of the organisations they work for and more focused on sustainability and CSR (and therefore less focused on the immediate bottom line). Most businesses are still reticent to commit fully to such programmes.
And so the question is: will Harvard take the risk and change its syllabus to prepare better leaders in the long run even though in the short term it could put their ‘business’ on the line? If they do, then this ‘Hippocratic Oath’ for business would mean something. But I don’t think they will any time soon.
