What Corporate Governance Can Learn from Catholic Social Teaching
This reflection focuses on what insights Catholic Social Teaching (CST) can provide for corporate governance. I argue that the ‘standard’ agency theory is overly reductionist and insufficiently incorporates important economic limitations (such as asymmetric information, incomplete contracts, and the need for coordination) as well as human frailty. As a result, such agency theory insufficiently distinguishes firms from markets, which can easily relativize how we treat others and facilitate rationalization of unethical behavior. I then explore how three pillars of CST—human dignity, solidarity, and subsidiarity—can help overcome these limitations. CST proposes a vision of the business corporation as a community of persons, working together in cooperative business relationships toward the shared purpose of contributing to human flourishing.
KeywordsCorporate governance Catholic Social Teaching Human flourishing Solidarity Subsidiarity
I am indebted to many people for insightful conversations, feedback, and helpful reading recommendations, especially to two anonymous reviewers, David Lutz, Domènec Mele (the editor), Lloyd Sandelands, Martin Schlag, and seminar participants at IESE Business School, the University of Notre Dame, Ave Maria University, Arizona State, Villanova, and Northwestern University School of Law. I remain solely responsible for any errors.
- Benedictus, XVI. (2009). Encyclical letter ‘Caritas in Veritate’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1932). The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Cortright, S. A., & Naughton, M. J. (Eds.). (2002). Rethinking the purpose of business—Interdisciplinary Essays from the Catholic Social Tradition. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
- Cremers, M., Litov, L., & Sepe, S. (2015). Staggered boards and firm value, revisited. Working Paper, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
- Cremers, M., Masconale, S., & Sepe, S. (2016). Commitment and Entrenchment in Corporate Governance? Northwestern Law Review, 110 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
- Cremers, M., & Sepe, S. (2016). The shareholder value of empowered boards. Stanford Law Review, 68(1), 67–148.Google Scholar
- Follett, M. P. (1942). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett (Henry C. Metcalf & L. Urwick, eds.), New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
- Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.Google Scholar
- Garvey, G. E. (2003). The theory of the fir, managerial responsibility, and catholic social teaching. Journal of Markets and Morality, 6(2), 525–540.Google Scholar
- Glendon, M. A. (2011). The bearable lightness of dignity. First Things, 213, 41–45.Google Scholar
- John Paul II. (1981). Encyclical letter ‘Laborem Exercens’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- John Paul II. (1987). Encyclical letter ‘Sollicitudo Rei Socialis’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- John Paul II. (1991). Encyclical letter ‘Centesimus Annus’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- Johnson, W. C., Karpoff, J. M., & Yi, S. (2015). The bonding hypothesis of takeover defenses: Evidence from IPO firms. Journal of Financial Economics, 117(2), 307–332.Google Scholar
- Leo XIII. (1891). Encyclical letter ‘Rerum Novarum’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- Macey, J. R. (1991). An economic analysis of the various rationales for making shareholders the exclusive beneficiairies of corporate fiduciary duties. Stenson Law Review, 21, 57–90.Google Scholar
- Malinvaud, E., & Glendon, M. A. (Eds.) (2006). Conceptualization of the person in social sciences. The proceedings of the eleventh plenary session of the pontifical academy of social sciences. Vatican City: Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.Google Scholar
- Mayer, C. (2013). Firm commitment: Why the corporation is failing us and how to restore trust in it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Melé, D., & Dierksmeier, C. (Eds.). (2012). Human development in business. Values and Humanistic management in the in the encyclical ‘‘caritas in veritate’’. New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.Google Scholar
- Pieper, J. (1966). The four cardinal virtues. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
- Pieper, J. (1997). Faith, hope, love. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.Google Scholar
- Pius XI. (1931). Encyclical letter ‘Quadragesimo Anno’. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.Google Scholar
- Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. (2004). Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana. (available at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html).
- Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. (2014). Vocation of the Business Leader—A reflection. (available at http://www.stthomas.edu/cathstudies/cst/research/publications/vocationbusinesslead/).
- Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011, January–February) Creating shared value—How to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
- Rajan, R., & Zingales, L. (1998, May). Power in a theory of the firm. Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp. 387–432.Google Scholar
- Ross, S. (1987). The interrelations of finance and economics: Theoretical perspectives. American Economic Review, 77, 29–34.Google Scholar
- Schlag, M., & Mercado, J. (Eds.). (2012). Free markets and the culture of the common good. Berlin: Springer-Heildeger.Google Scholar