Almost 50 years ago the New Yorker magazine presented on its cover a sketch purporting to represent the view that New Yorkers see when they look out at the world. It showed the main streets of Manhattan, then the Hudson River, the centre and west of the USA, the Pacific Ocean and beyond that, on the horizon, China, Japan and Russia. That may not be the perspective we tend to have, with our maps showing Europe in the middle with America over on the left and Asis on the right. But was it nevertheless a reminder that we view the world from where we are and our how we have been accustomed to see it – which may not be how others see it, writes Prof Simon Bridge.
That sketch reminded me that such a perspective is not a complete view and may not even be a helpful one. It also illustrates the tendency we have to adopt and share a perspective without being conscious of its limitations – and that has led me to wonder if sometimes we view our economic lives from an unconsciously acquired, and limited, ‘business’ perspective.
Do we tend to view our work and our lives as different activities and view our economic engagement through a ‘business’ filter? And is that ‘business’ filter essentially an application of how we think big businesses do, or should, operate?
It was also about 50 years ago, and in another New York publication: the New York Times, that an article by Milton Friedman was published under the headline: The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The article actually made it clear that Friedman was talking about large corporations whose shareholders generally wanted the companies in which they invested to make money for them, but the article nevertheless helped to spread a belief that all ‘businesses’ have an obligation to maximise their income.
The shareholders of many big business may indeed thus want those businesses to focus on profitability – but has that big business-based view been extended to all businesses? And, as a result, do we, in effect, unconsciously adopt a big-business perspective when we think about anything labelled ‘business’? Do we, for instance, think that:
Its aim must be to maximise profit – and therefore it should try to grow.
It should prepare for the future by researching its market, developing a business plan and operating in accordance with that plan.
Its decisions should be logically based.
But actually those beliefs are clearly not correct for all enterprises, especially small ones. Small businesses may be called ‘businesses, but they are not small big businesses, and do not behave like that. Many are not run with the prime purpose of maximising income, but often have other aims such as realising an idea, sustaining a life-style, continuing a tradition or achieving independence. Also the wise ones do not expect all forecasts to be realised and therefore succeed by being able to operate in uncertain conditions – and the people running them are often influenced by social pressures however illogical that might be.
Therefore such businesses will not be properly understood, or helpfully guided, by viewing then from a big business-based perspective. Their owners may well want their businesses to succeed – but that means achieving their aims which are not necessarily about money and continual growth, especially with all the time and bother that entails.
If we are in business, or involved in supporting business, does it help to subscribe to the apparently officially held view with ideas such as a business must have a growth imperative? If we have such a view, can we understand’ its likely imperfections and try, instead, to see other possible perspectives of what ‘business’ means?
Instead should we try to accept and understand a perspective that better represents and suits the reality of how business fits into people’s lives – and not how we might think their lives should fit into business?
