Skip to content

12 August, 2026

  • Saved Articles
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Board Agenda

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Risk
  • Ethics
  • News
  • Insight
    • Categories

      • View all
      • Governance
      • Strategy
      • Risk
      • Ethics
      • Board expertise
      • Finance
      • Technology
    • board skills clash

      When board skills clash

      Board composition in terms of expertise has a clear impact on entrepreneurial decision-making and strategy,...

      create value

      4 ways to help your CFO create value

      The chief financial officer has a vital contribution to make to the board’s strategy on...

      leadership crisis

      How to fix the leadership crisis

      Unpopular opinion? It’s time for organisations to shift away from feelings to focus on competency...

  • Comment
      • View all
    • create value

      4 ways to help your CFO create value

      The chief financial officer has a vital contribution to make to the board’s strategy on...

      leadership crisis

      How to fix the leadership crisis

      Unpopular opinion? It’s time for organisations to shift away from feelings to focus on competency...

      AI behaviour

      How do you measure AI adoption?

      It’s easy to produce metrics on AI software deployment, but these are pointless without tracking...

  • Interviews
      • View All Interviews
      • Podcasts
      • Webinars
    • governance

      How better governance helps private companies grow

      If governance is to become mature, management decision-making has no place on the board’s agenda,...

      future-ready

      Is your board ‘future-ready’?

      The survival of a business in uncertain times depends on its ability to pivot as...

      investor confidence

      Lack of audit reform ‘will hit investor confidence’

      Government's failure to push ahead with audit reform is a risk to UK investments, the...

  • Board Careers
      • View All
    • board skills clash

      When board skills clash

      Board composition in terms of expertise has a clear impact on entrepreneurial decision-making and strategy,...

      female ceos

      FTSE 100 CEO appointments rise

      The number of CEO appointments has doubled in six months, although the global picture suggests...

      board role

      How to engage with outreach

      When board opportunities knock, should you answer the door? Here are tips from a new...

  • Resource Centre
      • White Paper Downloads
      • Book Reviews
      • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
    • FRC Annual Review of Audit Quality 2026

      This Financial Reporting Council report uses findings from its supervisory activities to assess audit quality...

      Governance Guide: How Boards Drive Growth

      This Board Agenda Governance Guide investigates how directors can evolve to drive performance and growth...

      Organizational Transformation in the Age of AI

      This World Economic Forum paper looks at how organisations must re-architect their workflows and operating...

  • Events
  • Search by topic
    • Governance
    • Strategy
    • Risk
    • Ethics
    • Regulation
    • ESG
    • Investor Relations
    • Careers
    • Board Expertise
    • finance
    • Technology

US corporates ‘should do more’ to help environment and low-paid workers

by Gavin Hinks on September 1, 2021

Respondents to a recent US poll say a more “evolved” form of capitalism is needed to better reflect the interests of stakeholders.

ESG strategy icons over green cityscape

Image: Metamorworks/Shutterstock.com

Favorite

Two years on from a declaration by the biggest US companies that they would switch to serving stakeholder interests, public opinion says large corporates should be doing more for the environment and for the lowest paid workers.

The news comes in a survey carried out to monitor reaction to the Business Roundtable’s statement in 2019 that it would prioritise stakeholders over shareholders. Roundtable members include companies such JP Morgan Chase, Apple and Amazon. The statement was a seminal moment in corporate governance of recent times, and prompted commentary and studies around the world.

The survey, conducted by JUST Capital, a not-for-profit that ranks companies on their efforts to make a societal contribution, finds that there is generally support for big business and capitalism in the US. Broadly 65% of those polled believe large companies “promote an economy that serves all Americans”. But there are marked areas where improvements could be made.

While 68% say large companies have a positive impact on shareholders, only 41% say they do the same for the environment, with 36% saying the impact is negative. When it comes to workers, 32% of those surveyed say large companies have a negative impact on their financial well-being, while 46% say the impact is positive.

When asked to offer their views on the current form of American capitalism, the largest proportion say there is more work to be done. When asked if capitalism “ensures the greater good of society”, 41%—the biggest group—say a more “evolved” form of capitalism is needed. A similar figure, 42%, say more work is needed to produce a society fit for the “next generation”. And again, when asked if capitalism works for the average American, 40%, again the largest group, say a bigger effort is required.

Improving the treatment of stakeholders

According to Jennifer Tonti, managing director of research for JUST Capital, recent times have forced US companies to think of their stakeholders “like never before”. Perception may be good in some areas, but not in all.

“Based on our findings from this latest poll, we see that the American public generally perceives the actions of corporate America as being positive—but when it comes down to brass tacks, there is much more to be done to support specific stakeholders, principally the environment and our nation’s lowest paid workers,” writes Tonti.

Elsewhere there have been less generous assessments of the Business Roundtable. In a research paper out at the end of August, Harvard academics Lucian Bebchuk and Roberto Tallarita conclude the 2019 statement seems to have been “for show” and served to side step government intervention.

After a study of Roundtable member documents detailing company purpose and guidance, the pair commented: ”Overall our findings support the view that the BRT (Business Roundtable) statement did not represent a meaningful commitment and was not planned or expected to bring about meaningful improvements in the treatment of stakeholders.”

They added that the “main” impact may be to “insulate” corporate from shareholders and to head off potential action from politicians and regulators.

Pessimistically, they concluded: “Reliance on the discretion of corporate leaders to serve stakeholders, as supporters of stakeholder governance advocate, would be an ineffective and counterproductive approach to the protection of stakeholders.”

JUST Capital contains some good news for Business Roundtable, but there is also evidence that a significant number of people are not convinced. That will add to the emerging view that a good deal more work may be needed if the 2019 statement is to prove meaningful.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • Mail

Related Posts

  • Good governance boosts companies' CSR performance
    July 5, 2021
    Board members looking at corporate reports

    Study concludes that “corporate board reforms... appear to have a positive spillover for non-financial stakeholders”.

  • Academic warns that 'good' corporations are bad for democracy
    September 13, 2021
    US flag flying on Wall Street

    So called 'good' corporations have “not actually changed, at least not in terms of their legal mandates”, claims Joel Bakan.

  • US corporate governance improvements 'slowed or stagnated' in 2021
    January 13, 2022
    Employees talking outside offices

    Report suggests crisis "fatigue" is eating away at gains made during 2020, with employee issues and ESG highlighted as concerns.

  • Business Roundtable stakeholder statement 'mostly for show', says study
    August 25, 2021
    Jamie Dimon

    Harvard researchers say signatories have made few changes in company documents that indicate a corporate purpose favouring stakeholders.

Search


Follow Us

Most Popular

Featured Resources

The Future of FTSE 350 Chairs: Pathways, Pipelines & Barriers 2026

This report is a collaboration between the FTSE Women Leaders Review and Professor...

Agentic AI from principles to practice 

‘A C-suite guide to capturing value without losing control’, this Forvis Mazars...

Route to the Top: Europe 2026 

This survey report from Heidrick & Struggles finds that companies are tending...
board's role in a rewired world fgs 2026 cover

A hard job getting harder: The board's role in a rewired world

The role of a corporate director is demanding intellectually, ethically and strategically—and...

Boardroom resilience: Practical governance for risk, readiness and rapid response

Boards are operating in a world defined by uncertainty. Geopolitical tensions, climate...

Board Value Index Summer 2026

Board Intelligence found 86% of directors say rigid processes and inconsistent frameworks...

Governance Guide: Navigating Conflict in the Boardroom

The 'Governance Guide' on navigating conflict in the boardroom provides practical...

Becoming a non-executive director (4th edition)

Board composition is the subject of much debate, while the role of the non-executive...

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Stay current with a wide-ranging source of governance news and intelligence and apply the latest thinking to your boardroom challenges. Subscribe


  • Editors & Contributors
  • Editorial Advisory Board
  • Board Advisory & Corporate Services
  • Media Marketing Solutions
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Board Director Network
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookies

Copyright © 2026 Questor Media Group Ltd.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy