Polylogue as a platform for governance: integrating people, the planet, profit and posterity

Abstract

Although the current wave of globalization is the result of unprecedented scientific and technological advances, through history, movements of an international nature have been, to a large extent, about the spread of political and economic ideas across borders. “Geopolitical realism is based on the interests of the state”. Scientific and technological advances, together with the opening of markets to the free passage of goods, services and finance, has led to a huge growth in world trade. However, such positive developments have also their downside. The findings of the United Nations Human Development Programme Report highlight that global inequalities in income and living standards have reached grotesque proportions. Further, such disparities are linked to ever‐intensified environmental degradation and the extinction of some 11,046 species. Such circumstances have witnessed the growth of community‐based local currencies, the emergence of a social movement advocating corporate social reasonability (CSR) and a growing literature critical of the Anglo‐American corporate governance model, where shareholder wealth maximization is the driving force. Yet, the philosophy and practice of shareholder wealth maximization persists. This paper explores the effects of free‐market economics, globalization and western capitalist practices in terms of their consequences for the planet, people, profit and posterity (the four Ps). A case is made outlining the need for an advanced corporate governance model that integrates the four Ps. In so doing, the paper seeks inspiration from the ancient philosophy of Buddhism and, in conclusion, examines the role of the Business School in developing future, reflexive practitioners, equipped to effectively provide the necessary balance between shareholder expectations and stakeholder needs within a new paradigm of a balanced society.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.