Contesting the Value of “Creating Shared Value”

Abstract

This article critiques Porter and Kramer's concept of creating shared value. The strengths of the idea are highlighted in terms of its popularity among practitioner and academic audiences, its connecting of strategy and social goals, and its systematizing of some previously underdeveloped, disconnected areas of research and practice. However, the concept suffers from some serious shortcomings, namely: it is unoriginal; it ignores the tensions inherent to responsible business activity; it is naïve about business compliance; and it is based on a shallow conception of the corporation's role in society. [Michael Porter and Mark Kramer were invited to respond to this article. Their commentary follows along with a reply by Crane and his co-authors.]

Should the Evolution of Stakeholder Theory Be Discontinued Given Its Limitations?

“…Our choice is informed by the fact that their view has become one of the most widely accepted interpretations amongst academics and practitioners [10]. Their notion of shared value arose from their work [35] on the non-profit sector.…”

“…1) Because it is derived from shareholder theory, it views society and its needs as something the firm can address successfully in economic terms [10]. 2) It assumes that firms act in compliance with the law [10].…”

“…1) Because it is derived from shareholder theory, it views society and its needs as something the firm can address successfully in economic terms [10]. 2) It assumes that firms act in compliance with the law [10]. Yet, a literature review of analysis by other academics of the limitations of regulation as a compensatory mechanism for negative externalities concludes that regulation does not offer a flawless solution [11].…”

Towards Competitive Regional Development Through Clusters: Approaches to Their Performance Evaluation

“…The concept of creating shared value which is emphasized by scholars in cluster studies has also been criticized for several reasons, such as not being original, ignoring tension between social and economic goals, being naive about the challenges of business compliance and having basis of shallow conception of the corporation's role in society. On the other hand, this concept has strengths for being successfully appealing to practitioners and scholars, elevating social goals to strategic level, articulating a clear role for governments in responsible behavior, adding rigor to ideas of "conscious capitalism" and providing an umbrella construct loosely connected concepts (Crane et al 2014).…”

“…Different methods are applied in order to analyze qualitative and quantitative data, such as correlation and regression analysis (Casanueva et al 2013;Lai et al 2014;Tavassoli, Carbonara 2014;Crespo et al 2014;D'Angelo et al 2013), gravitation model (Castellani et al 2013), case analysis (Ben Lafeita and Rabeu 2013;Boschma et al 2013;Bouncken and Kraus 2013;Carswell 2013;Lorenzen, Mudambi 2013;Tokatli 2013;Dobusch and Schussler 2013;Morrison et al 2013) or literature analysis (Crane et al 2014;D'Agostino et al 2013;Maskell 2014;Feldman 2014;D'Este et al 2013;Ketels 2013). The problem of providing the most effective way to evaluate the data of different phenomena, which are mentioned in clusters' studies, could be by performing a quantitative evaluation of clusters' performance ).…”