How Great Companies Think Differently

Rosabeth Moss Kanter

Article | Harvard Business Review | November 2011

How Great Companies Think Differently

Abstract

Corporate leaders have long subscribed to the belief that the sole purpose of business is to make money. That narrow view, deeply embedded in the American capitalist system, molds the actions of most corporations, constraining them to focus on maximizing short-term profits and returns to shareholders at the expense of worker safety and health, the environment, and society in general. In this article, I argue that a very different logic informs the practices of most high-performing and sustainable companies: institutional logic. These companies believe that they are more than money-making machines: they are a vehicle for advancing societal goals. They deliver more than just financial returns; they also build enduring institutions. At great companies researched for this article, institutional logic takes its place beside financial logic in managerial decision making. Six facets of institutional logic—a common purpose, a long-term focus, emotional engagement, partnering with the public, innovation, and self-organization—radically alter leadership and corporate behavior and form the building blocks of a more sustainable competitive advantage.

Keywords: Decision Choices and Conditions; Profit; Leadership; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact; Business and Shareholder Relations; Behavior; Social Issues; Competitive Advantage;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Purchase

Citation:

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. "How Great Companies Think Differently." Harvard Business Review 89, no. 11 (November 2011).

Gun violence was a significant problem in America. Three Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative Fellows Christy Wood, Russell Sternlicht, and Gareth Glaser each decided to do something about gun safety. They each used their professional and leadership experience to identify their own solutions to the issue. Wood created a set of principles for investments funds to pressure gun manufacturers and gun sellers within their portfolios to adopt safety standards. Sternlicht designed a membership-based lobbying and advocacy group in order to harness the power of mass movements to create positive change. And Glaser founded a smart-gun company whose product could help reduce certain types of deaths and injuries. Would any of these three innovations move beyond the historical gridlock on gun safety?

This is a teaching note to the original case: Gun violence was a significant problem in America. Three Harvard Advanced Leadership Initiative Fellows Christy Wood, Russell Sternlicht, and Gareth Glaser each decided to do something about gun safety. They each used their professional and leadership experience to identify their own solutions to the issue. Wood created a set of principles for investments funds to pressure gun manufacturers and gun sellers within their portfolios to adopt safety standards. Sternlicht designed a membership-based lobbying and advocacy group in order to harness the power of mass movements to create positive change. And Glaser founded a smart-gun company whose product could help reduce certain types of deaths and injuries. Would any of these three innovations move beyond the historical gridlock on gun safety?

From 2008-2010 Anand Piramal ran a series of pilots for his digital healthcare startup, Piramal e-Swasthya (PeS) to “democratize healthcare” in rural areas of India. PeS ran into difficulties so Anand Piramal had to decide whether to continue the organization and if so how. In 2010, an unexpected opportunity emerged that could have significant implications for PeS’s organizational structure and future prospects. Anand Piramal now faced several options for PeS. He needed to weigh the pros and cons of each option to make the best decision to fulfill his vision of providing quality healthcare services to “bottom-of-the-pyramid” populations. This case exemplifies the strategic decisions an entrepreneur must make to ensure that a social impact venture can be sustainable and scalable.

Faculty & Research

How Great Companies Think Differently

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author