The intent of this site is to offer an informed perspective on the business of business. That said, the following, while at first glance might seem to not align, a little further critical thinking places it squarely within the realm of the business of business, more specifically the identification of the responsibility business or more accurately is it a problem of irresponsibility with business as practiced.
If we continue to ask why, then we often get to the root toward a better understanding.
After a mass shooting event—and there are many each year—the go-to-utterance “our hearts and prayers go out to the families of the victims”, is heard from the public office holders we see at the other end of the camera. But then, without missing a beat, their go-to-response to the shooting in the moment they unflinchingly offer their questions of exploration into why this particular tragic event, placing the sole blame on the shooter. It is the mass shooting version of pilot error, disregarding the entire system facilitating it happening.
Mass killing-by-gun happens so often it is endemic in the U.S.—no other industrialized country comes close! The U.S. presents the context (a.k.a. system). No, the U.S. doesn’t have a higher incidence of mental illness but the U.S. does have a higher market penetration of gun sales/ownership. Moreover research has shown that most people with mental illness are not violent and so the link between mental illness and mass shooters is a weak one at best—far more other factors are involved.
The U.S. has the highest per capital firearm ownership in the world. A PEW Research Center survey found thirty-two percent of U.S. adults are gun owners, yet the number of guns per 100 people is 120—a little over one gun for every person. Clearly, gun ownership in the U.S. is highly concentrated within a segment of the population. What a profitable business strategy, getting your customers to buy more of your stuff—now that’s customer loyalty!
Why do these mass killings continue to happen? As noted above, the avoidance tactic of placing focus solely on the specific shooter in moment, diverts attention and effort away from actually understanding the facilitating system that makes it possible, if not probable. With each individual presenting his unique story, we never really get to understanding the epidemic of mass shootings and gun violence in general. Yet, increasing the number of guns in the mix by arming teachers, resource officers and additional police presence are offered as the solution. This will likely increase gun sales, but it doesn’t get at the root.
So, the story line is that there is not enough political will (a.k.a. moral courage) to stop it–to make it so that he can’t or is far less likely to happen!
What’s influencing the political will? Agency theory: Industry money flowing to elected officials with authority over policy transforms elected officials from agents of the public (i.e. care and concern for people’s well-being) to agents of the industry (i.e. care and concern for an industry’s profit ).
Why the change in agency? There is just too much money to be had from those in pursuit of profit through growth in market penetration. We mustn’t forget, how much money one accumulates (a.k.a. wealth) is the measure of success in capitalist society. There is little to be had in caring for peoples’ well-being and a boat load to be had in facilitating the intent of business.
Why is this continuing to happen?
The simplest, logical and most obvious answer is because they can: that is to say, the system is facilitating industry, political officials—as well as shooters—so they can?
It’s just business (ah hum, ‘what’s in-it-for-me’), nothing personal!
The Overarching Question
Since the above applies to all types of industry—all industries have lobbyists—we must ask, what is the meaning of corporate social responsibility when the intent of business is the maximization of short-term profit? In effect, with the corporate intent not encompassing responsibility to society—actually running counter to it—then corporate social responsibility is an oxymoron. To the business minded a society (of people) is a resource for exploitation, not a responsibility—no different than any and all other resources (think Nature)!
So here is something to think about: Should business/industry adapt to and meet the needs of people in society or should people in society adapt to and meet the needs of business/industry?