Article By Tobias Kelly

Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash

In modern life, corporations operate not merely as business entities but as powerful social institutions with significant influence over culture, governance, and even our personal values. They mould our landscapes, our behaviours, and our futures. Joel Bakan (2004) argues that the corporation’s rise to dominance has fundamentally altered society by embedding values centred on profit, efficiency, and competitiveness into the fabric of everyday life. Yet, these are values that primarily serve the corporation’s interests-interests which are, as Bakan states, inherently “pathological”, prioritising profits over ethics, sustainability, and human welfare. Recognising corporations as social institutions is crucial to understanding how deeply they impact our world and why public scrutiny and regulation are essential.

For example, Amazon’s reach into virtually every corner of daily life. Originally an online bookstore, Amazon has now grown to dominate retail, media streaming, and logistics. As Bartley (2018) explains, transnational corporations like Amazon navigate loosely regulated global markets to amass power across countries and industries. However, beyond profit-making, Amazon’s very business model has reshaped consumer habits, labour norms, and even how we perceive time and convenience. Its attitude of “get what you want, when you want it”, speaks to a philosophy of immediate gratification, yet this convenience is not without cost. Amazon’s warehouse workers face demanding conditions, with limited breaks, strict quotas, and constant surveillance, contributing to what Bakan (2004) calls the “psychopathic” nature of corporations, which overlooks human well-being if it conflicts with productivity.

This assertion of corporate power may seem exaggerated. After all, corporations don’t command loyalty or shape ideologies in the way political parties or religious organisations might. But they do cultivate brand loyalties and ideals that shape consumer identities, which can be so central to modern culture that opting out or missing out feels nearly impossible.

Corporations also assume social responsibility. Many companies now incorporate Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs that seek to offset some of the harm their operations might cause by supporting environmental or social programs. But while these programs may signal corporate goodwill, they often reflect more strategic objectives: to appease consumers, pre-empt regulatory backlash, and ultimately, enhance brand loyalty. For instance, oil companies that fund climate research or green initiatives still contribute to the very crisis they purport to mitigate. Bartley (2018) refers to this phenomenon as “symbolic compliance”, where companies employ CSR as a way to appear ethically aligned without altering their fundamental profit-driven motives.

The implications of unregulated corporate power are not confined to symbolic gestures or corporate philanthropy. In many cases, corporate influence actively shapes policy, trade agreements, and local economies, often at the expense of smaller competitors and public interests. The “revolving door” between government and industry is particularly illustrative, with former corporate leaders taking on regulatory roles and vice versa, blurring the line between public duty and corporate gain. Bartley (2018) points out that in the global governance sphere, corporations have the power to influence trade laws and labour standards, often with little public oversight. This level of influence, unthinkable for corporations even a century ago, makes them architects of the legal and social environments in which they operate, and alongside which we live.

What can be done to moderate this influence? Recognising corporations as social institutions calls for a different approach to corporate accountability, one that demands transparent regulation, stronger laws, and, quintessentially, greater public involvement. As Bakan (2004) urges, “corporations must be challenged by both government and civil society if their power is to be contained”. This means actively supporting policies that mandate fair labour practices, environmentally sound operations, and genuine corporate transparency. Consumers, too, hold power; supporting ethical companies and sustainable practices can begin to shift demand away from the most extractive and harmful practices.

The corporation’s rise to dominance need not be irreversible, nor should we accept it as an inevitable feature of modern society. Just as we demand accountability from governments, we must demand it from corporations, reminding them that their right to operate does not override our right to a sustainable, ethical, and humane world. In the words of Margaret Mead, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world”. By holding corporations to account, we can create a society that values well-being over profit, and human connection over corporate expansion.

References:

Bakan, J. (2004) Chapter 1: The Corporation’s Rise to Dominance. In The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power. New York: Free Press. (pp. 5-27)

Bartley, T (2018) “Transnational Corporations and Global Governance” Annual Review of Sociology 44:145–65

Related