Before we kiss good-bye the season of goodwill, let's consider an extraordinary idea: that 2013 could turn out to be the year of "The Business of Kindness".
It's the title of a book by Olivia McIvor, published six years ago when the idea that companies should benchmark kindness towards staff and customers sounded like a wacky counter-culture. To those on the far left, this sort of compassionate capitalism was simply an oxymoron, while on the right the notion of an unfettered marketplace was immutable. So capitalism continued to be embodied by Alan Sugar's Apprentice with its sharp-elbowed, thrusting wannabes, happy to ride roughshod over everyone to get to the top. Meanwhile global corporations' assertions that they required freedom from regulation in order to operate still trumped democratic debate.
But 2012 witnessed a shift in the public mood. Libor-fixing, another mis-selling scandal and revelations about how major global companies dodge tax created a wave of public disgust. On a more local level, the continuing demise of small independent shops and pubs, leaving sterile high streets and hollowed-out communities, got people thinking about the sort of society they wanted.
Politicians have picked up on this revulsion. Labour's Ed Miliband was first, with his clunky, misunderstood conference speech of October 2011 about producers and predators. It was always less about good and bad British companies than the debate going on inside the business community and the recognition that German capitalism, with more emphasis on social responsibility and long-term goals, made a lot more sense than the UK model, focused relentlessly on quarterly profits.
This thinking is not new. Commentators like The Work Foundation's Will Hutton have always argued that firms that set out to achieve social and public benefits are most likely to make profits in the long term. The same philosophy inspired the business ethics of dissenting movements like the Quakers in the 19th century.
Perhaps what has changed is not just revelations about self-serving corporate greed but the arrival of what has been called "Generation G": young people moulded in the age of social media, with its emphasis on collaborating and sharing, who value generosity over greed.
In the world of compassionate capitalism, size matters. It's easier for a small company, like Green City Wholefoods or Cafedirect, to base its philosophy on the ethics of its founders. The problems come when they try to scale up. Certainly some big companies are heavily into marketing gimmicks known as "random acts of kindness", such as sending bunches of flowers to people who tweet about having a lousy day. That's not to be confused with kindness as a core value. Yet that too can survive in big companies, as witnessed by Ben & Jerry's (now part of Unilever), John Lewis and the Co-op.
To shift capitalism towards kindness we need two things. First, we need governments to nudge companies towards sustainable and equitable capitalism. That means promoting long-term business models that generate value-added jobs, as in Germany where there is more collaboration between finance, innovators, technocratic industrialists and workers. It means supporting a ban on practices like high-frequency trading (using computer models to spot market patterns and trigger massive share transactions) that exacerbate market volatility and short-termism. And it means regulating the huge pubcos that are jacking up rents and imposing monopolies on pubs.
Secondly, concerned individuals must put their money where their mouths are by supporting their local bookshops and boutiques, rather than using them as showrooms then buying cheaper online. And by patronising local cafes that put something back into the community rather than fickle global chains that hide profits offshore. So let's ditch that "twas ever thus" pessimism and wish each other a Kinder New Year.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article