The death last week of economist Milton Friedman has prompted plenty of comments about his attacks on corporate social responsibility.
The social responsibility of business, Friedman famously said, was to increase its profits.
Joel Makower in his WorldChanging blog argues that the "doctrinaire Friedmanesque line" ignores the fact that you can run a business and be socially responsible. "We know better now," Makower says.
Actually, the whole debate about profits versus purpose is a false dichotomy and I think Friedman, deep down, would have acknowledged this. I explain why in my piece here.
Friedman argued that it might make business sense for a company to build closer links with the community. Just don't call it corporate social responsibility, he said.
Consider for example the way businesses, including Wal-Mart, are building communities, as detailed in this piece from Fast Company.
So is this corporate social responsibility, or is it about the bottom line?
Does it really matter?
no comment untill now