It is December 2008, and the business world is currently undergoing massive upheaval and scandalous revelations. The people of the world are in shock, as their beliefs and understandings about the workings of corporate culture are being shaken to the core. Many will attempt to blame the myriad of individuals in seats of power for this ongoing collapse, and from a limited perspective this is valid. But for a growing number of others, a re-examination of the corporate structure itself and the rolls we have created that somehow allow the opportunity for such corruption to thrive is the only true way to begin to find the solution.

Perhaps no greater role exemplifies the epitome of corporate hierarchal power than that of the Chief Executive Officer. Ideally, the administrator of this position should be of such a noble character in order to balance the awesome responsibility of directing the various internal and inter-business relationships of the company with a moral responsibility to environmental stewardship, fair and charitable practice, and abstinence from greed. As it stands, these qualities seem to be lacking in a large portion of the corporate world. What has gone wrong? If one believes that people are by and large good intentioned and fair minded, then why are such a seemingly small percentage of these people in seats of corporate power? Another question we might ask: what type of person has a desire to be in this type of position in the first place?

It was obvious to his co-workers that Jerry Flaherty, the former president of Caterpillar inc., was reaching for the stars from his lowly beginnings as a mailroom clerk. After his foot was in the door, he worked long hours, attended night school and management seminars and eventually landed a position as a line supervisor. Of course, this position required even longer hours, and the performance of monotonous tasks but he kept at it while at the same time earning a masters in industrial engineering. His education opened up the opportunity to become a future expansion planner and eventually the president and C.E.O.

Once at the top, Jerry's focus was on developing and executing plans for global production of their products, namely large scale industrial construction, mining, and excavating equipment. He used his engineering and planning expertise to implement an ingenious system for designing interchangeable parts for the equipment and mass producing them on or near the needed jobsites, and he created a trade-in program that gave a myriad of incentives to potential buyers. He utilized his own knack for talent recognition to pair his staff with appropriate tasks to maximize their abilities, and embarked on successful joint ventures with other large scale equipment companies like Navistar. As a result of his highly skilled and dynamic leadership, he helped to double Caterpillar's annual revenue during his tenure as president.

With respect to such corporate mantras as "growth at all cost" and "increase the bottom line" Jerry Flaherty seems to be the model of success. He had the single minded determination coupled with the dynamic flexibility required to complete complex undertakings on a global scale. And he had the prudence to apply his scientific background to achieving massive increases in efficiency of productivity that translated into huge net profits. So he excelled in performing the first part of our "definition of an ideal C.E.O."  But what about the balance of the equation: namely environmental stewardship, fair and charitable practice, and abstinence from greed?

One thing to consider is that to a large extent, a company has no control over what is done with their products by the end user. Now of course, it is befitting that a company incorporate all necessary safety precautions to protect the end user from harm, but it might be fair to say that a company's legal if not moral responsibilities for the product would end at the point of sale. Of course there are exceptions, like when the company manufactures products like advanced weapons and bombs, which are meant for no other purpose than to murder people. Or when a company sells or continues to sell their products to a user they are aware intends to use it for morally apprehensible purposes. When Jerry Flaherty was the president of Caterpillar, he did not act to block sales to great numbers of organizations that used their excavation equipment to clear cut rainforest and illegally remove homes in politically hostile regions. His failure to enforce guidelines in this respect is reflected in many multibillion dollar international organizations whose motivation is greed and profit. For all of his personal achievements and wonderful talents, he displayed interest in little more than self preservation and the material advancement of his own company.

Charitable practices are often used as "empty gestures" to cover up the truth about a company's motives, which are de facto self interest. Money is spread liberally to foster the illusion that a company cares about humanity, or a particular cause or plight.  The reality is that money is given, often quite transparently, to appease or curry favor with a certain groups or organizations.  Jerry Flaherty openly admits that philanthropy is often about "projecting the right image" and will talk with mock pride about the millions of dollars that Caterpillar donates to the communities in which it operates factories. He isn't quick to add that many of these factories take away natural resources, environmental cleanliness, and quality of life, in exchange for "community initiatives" on Caterpillar's terms. He will also tell you about the hundreds of schools that Caterpillar donates money to, but won't further say that these are only schools in poor rural areas where children are likely to work in Caterpillar’s factories, or colleges in which a large percentage of graduates seek Caterpillar employment.

The issue at the heart of this debate is weather these policies are indicative of the failure of the man, or the failure of the system, and I would suggest both. The key, however, is not to consider the man as separate from the systems that govern him. We must remember that every institution, political entity, law and organization on the planet was created to serve the good of humanity, and not the other way around. The ways that international corporations have been allowed to operate are no longer sustainable and will continue to clash until we all develop ways of relating to each other with more integrity and consideration for humanity and the earth as a whole.

-Thank you, M, for stringing our thoughts together so competently.

---Merry Christmas!---

From:  dmaloney@mail.bradley.edu