not the reimagining I was hoping for

Oct 30

published 9.17.20

This summer, I co-hosted a virtual book chat on Reimagining Capitalism in a World on Fire by Rebecca Henderson, a Harvard professor and prominent economist. I was lured in by Henderson’s powerful title and the fact that she’s not only a woman writing about business (still a rarity), but also a leading authority on organizational and strategic change for over 30 years. Against the backdrop of COVID-19, Black Lives Matter, and primary elections, this book was the outlet for the hope and creativity I craved. Admittedly, I might have pinned one too many expectations on it.

Fast-forward 272 pages. Rather than feeling energized or inspired, I felt deflated. I wasn’t alone in this feeling of wanting more, either. The book club agreed that for a book touted (see book flap) as “the intellectual breakthrough that will spur business to play a leading role in solving [...] environmental degradation, economic inequality, and institutional collapse,” its content was rather... unimaginative.

Henderson does acknowledge our collective climate crisis (but that’s a low bar) and makes a case for sustainable capitalism. Yet, her five marching orders for change:

create shared value business models
build purpose-driven organizations (i.e. simply “treat people with respect”)
develop financial metrics to measure environmental and social impact
cooperate on self-regulatory standards across whole industries
support democratic reforms

are anything but ground-breaking. In fact, they’ve been the systemic framework for transforming capitalism for years. Michael Porter and Mark Kramer popularized shared value in 2011. BlackRock called for purpose-driven companies in 2018. Implementing a sustainability balanced scorecard has been on the agenda since the early 2000s. There’s abundant evidence that self-regulatory and voluntary standards are inherently flawed. And I can’t think of a more basic plea than “support democratic reforms.”

Reimagining Capitalism is less about “reimagining” altogether. What it really is, is a compilation of cases, in true Harvard form, that defends the minimal actions organizations must take to be resilient and competitive moving forward.

When I think about why Henderson’s book did not live up to its ambitious title, the answer is clear, overwhelmingly compelling, and stated by Henderson herself, whether she intended to or not: “Those of us who are doing well under the current system are probably the least well-positioned to see how rapidly change could come.”

Rebecca Henderson is a white woman who has done well under the current system; she’s made a living working for and teaching the elite. Any framework penned by someone of this pedigree is at risk of falling short of, and undermining, the grave structural changes truly needed to reach the “just and sustainable future” Henderson describes!

From praising Wal-Mart and Unilever as leaders in “high road capitalism” to rarely a mention of racial inequity and the role racism plays in perpetuating business as is, Henderson makes “radical change” palatable for those already in power.

But we don’t need palatable. We need decision-makers fluid in intersectionality, who are anti-racist, and not afraid to risk their stake in the game.

To truly get to a place where we not only squelch the fire, but all individuals and communities are thriving, we need more BIPOC, transgender, varied abled people, anything but more white cis-gendered folks, in roles of power and all levels of leadership across the pillars of our society, from government and academia, to business and nonprofit.

And we must welcome—not be threatened by—the imaginations of BIPOC, transgender, and varied abled people. Inclusive envisioning will set us on a path to a just and sustainable future.

disclaimer: i want to be mindful to not single out the author, as i do feel her heart and intention are honest. i know it sounds stereotypical, but i would surmise that any tenured professor of a well-endowed school could repeat these same mistakes. perhaps these are not the voices we should continue elevating. instead, let’s pass the mic to historically underrepresented voices to wax poetic with a fresh perspective.