Current Wave of Conceptual Revision of Business Goal Ideas
https://doi.org/10.21686/2413-2829-2025-5-243-253
Abstract
The article studies features of the current wave of conceptual review of today’s ideas about the business goal, which are stipulated by present day paradigm changes in the business environment. It is shown that revision of outdated ideas is connected with considering the corporate goal as a conceptual basis for elaboration of theoretical description of mechanisms of shaping the sustainable competitive organization development proceeding from its complicated link with society and nature. A shift in overseas research on corporate management that took place in the last decade caused domination of approaches based on the necessity to change radically the view on company nature and its goal. At the same time the author highlighted the importance to interpret the corporate goal as crossing frames of profits and dealing with elaboration of mechanisms of sustainable competitive development based on common value creation that corresponds to the general wealth and helps the organization and all concerned parties. The prospect put forward by the author in view of current changes in understanding the corporate goal proceeds from rejection of interpretation of profit as the key goal of business. This prospect can also promote reaching a new level of research on organization goal and corporate management based on regard to dubious nature of economic values and interests of individual and group entities of economy. The present approach focuses on the fact that in contrast to profit the added value of the organization acts as a generalized indicator of its contribution to profit yield in national product and a specific target landmark that unites and motivates all concerned parties. Therefore, a possibility arises to form competitive business-models with high added value that meet current realities.
About the Author
E. V. Biryukov
Ufa State Petroleum Technological University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Evgeniy V. Biryukov, PhD, Assistant Professor
Ufa Higher School of Economics and Management
450062; 1 Kosmonavtov Str.; Republic of Bashkortostan; Ufa
References
1. Aristotel. Collected Works. In 4 vol. Vol. 4. Moscow, Mysl, 1984. (In Russ.).
2. Blagov Yu. E. Evolyutsiya KSO i teoriya strategicheskogo upravleniya [Evolution of CSR and the Theory of Strategic Management]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya: Menedzhment [Bulletin of Saint Petersburg University. Series: Management], 2011, No. 1, pp. 3–26. (In Russ.).
3. Blagov Yu. E. ESG: transformatsiya interpretatsiy [ESG: Transformation of Interpretations]. Rossiyskiy zhurnal menedzhmenta [Russian Journal of Management], 2024, No. 2 (22), pp. 289–301. (In Russ.).
4. Biryukov E. V. Teorii sovremennogo predpriyatiya: novye napravleniya razvitiya [Theories of Modern Enterprise: New Directions of Development]. Ekonomicheskoe vozrozhdenie Rossii [Economic Revival of Russia], 2022, No. 4 (74), pp. 121–131. (In Russ.).
5. Korotkevich L. M., Barsukov A. A. Dobavlennaya stoimost kak kriteriy effektivnosti proizvodstvennogo protsessa v promyshlennosti [Added Value as a Criterion for the Efficiency of the Production Process in Industry]. Nauka i tekhnika [Science and Technology], 2016, No. 6 (15), pp. 536–545. (In Russ.).
6. Aust l., Cooke F. L., Muller-Camen M., Wood G. Achieving Sustainable Development Goals Through Common-Good HRM: Context, Approach and Practice. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 2024, Vol. 38 (2), pp. 93–110.
7. Basu S. Corporate Purpose: Why It Matters More Than Strategy. New York, Taylor & Francis, 1999.
8. Bansal P., Song H-C. Similar but Not the Same: Differentiating Corporate Sustainability from Corporate Responsibility. Academy of Management Annals, 2017, Vol. 11 (1), pp. 105–149.
9. Bart C. K., Baetz M. C. The Relationship between Mission Statements and Firm Performance: an Exploratory Study. Journal of Management Studies, 1998, Vol. 35 (6), pp. 823–853.
10. Bartlett C. A., Ghoshal S. Changing the Role of Top Management: Beyond Strategy to Purpose. Harvard Business Review, 1994, Vol. 72 (6), pp. 79–88.
11. Brosch N. Corporate Purpose: From a ‘Tower of Babel’ Phenomenon Towards Construct Clarity. Journal of Business and Economics, 2023, Vol. 93, pp. 567–595.
12. Bunderson J. S., Thakor A. V. Higher Purpose, Banking and Stability. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2021, January.
13. Busch T., Barnett M. L., Burritt R. L. et al. Moving Beyond the Business Case: How to Make Corporate Sustainability Work. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2024, Vol. 33 (2), pp. 776–787.
14. Crilly D., Ni N., Jiang Y. Do-no-Harm Versus Do-Good Social Responsibility: Attributional Thinking and the Liability of Foreignness. Strategic Management Journal, 2016, Vol. 37 (7), pp. 1316–1329.
15. Davis G. F. A New Finance Capitalism? Mutual Funds and Ownership Re-concentration in the United States. European Management Review, 2008, Vol. 5, pp. 11–21.
16. Drucker P. F. Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices. New York, Truman Talley Books, 1986.
17. Freeman R. E., Ginena K. Rethinking the Purpose of the Corporation: Challenges from Stakeholder Theory. Notizie Di Politeia, 2015, Vol. 31 (117), pp. 9–18.
18. Freeman R. E. The New Story of Business: Towards a More Responsible Capitalism. Society and Business Review, 2017, Vol. 122 (3), pp. 449–465.
19. Friedman M. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine, 1970, No. 13, pp. 32–33.
20. Gartenberg C., Prat A., Serafeim G. Corporate Purpose and Financial Performance. Organization Science, 2019, Vol. 30 (1), pp. 1–18.
21. Harrison J. S., Phillips R. A., Freeman R. E. On the 2019 Business Roundtable “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation”. Journal of Management, 2019, No. 46, pp. 1223–1237.
22. Hollensbe E., Wookey C., Hickey L., George G., Nichols C. V. Organizations with Purpose. Academy of Management Journal, 2014, Vol. 57 (5), pp. 1227–1234
23. Hsieh N-H., Meyer M., Rodin D., Klooster J. V. The Social Purpose of Corporations. Journal of the British Academy, 2018, No. 6, pp. 49–73.
24. Jimenez D., Franco I. B., Smith T. A. Review of Corporate Purpose: An Approach to Actioning the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Sustainability, 2021, No. 13, p. 3899.
25. Mayer C. The Future of the Corporation: Towards Humane Business. Journal of the British Academy, 2018, No. 6, pp. 1–16.
26. Mayer C. The Future of the Corporation and the Economics of Purpose. Journal of Management Studies, 2021, Vol. 58 (3), pp. 887–901.
27. Millstein I., Gordon J., Gilson R., Mayer C., Bresnahan K., Lipton M. Session I: Corporate Purpose and Governance. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 2019, No. 31, pp. 10–25.
28. Munro V. CSR for Purpose, Shared Value and Deep Transformation. Bingley, Emerald Publishing Limited, 2020.
29. Porter M. E., Kramer M. R. Creating Shared Value. Managing Sustainable Business. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, Springer, 2019, pp. 323–346.
30. Rüegg-Stürm J., Grand S. Das St. Galler Management-Modell: Management in Einer Komplexen Welt. Bern, Haupt, 2019.
31. Stout L. A. The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations and the Public. San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler, 2012.
32. Van Ingen R., Peters P., De Ruiter M., Robben H. Exploring the Meaning of Organizational Purpose at a New Dawn: The Development of a Conceptual Model through Expert Interviews. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, No. 12, p. 675543.
33. Wolf M., Mair J. Purpose, Commitment and Coordination around Small Wins: a Proactive Approach to Governance in Integrated Hybrid Organizations. Voluntas, 2019, Vol. 30 (3), pp. 535–548.
Review
For citations:
Biryukov E.V. Current Wave of Conceptual Revision of Business Goal Ideas. Vestnik of the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics. 2025;(5):243-253. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21686/2413-2829-2025-5-243-253
Views:
44
Email this article 