Thread: Attitudes Towards Big Business

Is it just me or does any else notice that the larger and/or more profitable a company is, the less complimentary people are about them. Why is that, especially in a capitalist state? We are all the first to congratulate an entrepreneur for capitalizing on a new idea but as the idea grows into a huge corporation then anti-sentiment starts to escalate. Now negativity could be seen as an unwitting tool in driving technology to improve a consequential situation and that is a good thing. Yet we still buy their product or else there is no company to complain about.

The smaller a business is, the more its ideology will be focused around the ideas of one person. Many business owners are actually decent people who want to make their living accomplishing something useful. The larger a business grows, the larger the group of people that have input into the decision making. The more decision makers, the less agreement you get about goals. Eventually all goals but one become irrelevant -- the bottom line. Profit becomes the all-consuming goal of nearly every really large business, to the exclusion of any altruistic impulses.

Originally Posted by danhanegan

The smaller a business is, the more its ideology will be focused around the ideas of one person. Many business owners are actually decent people who want to make their living accomplishing something useful. The larger a business grows, the larger the group of people that have input into the decision making. The more decision makers, the less agreement you get about goals. Eventually all goals but one become irrelevant -- the bottom line. Profit becomes the all-consuming goal of nearly every really large business, to the exclusion of any altruistic impulses.

But when you wish someone success in a business venture, it is understood that could happen. I think the negative sentiment starts happening when big business begins buying up the competition or uses their size to squeeze smaller businesses into bankruptcy.

I think in a lot of cases the large corporations that are disliked have earned the mistrust the public has of them.

GM is in the news again over recalls.

Originally Posted by dan hunter

I think in a lot of cases the large corporations that are disliked have earned the mistrust the public has of them.

GM is in the news again over recalls.

True enough. One of my pet peeves is the inaccessibility of senior management. In the past you might have been able to least get their attention, today it's a call centre, people who don't even work for the people they answer the phone for. Big business has trained the new generation to not expect to ever have personal contact with them.

If a company is more interested in making a profit than providing a service, then they don't deserve respect, only contempt and distrust.

Most big businesses care more about makng a profit than provding a service.

Originally Posted by danhanegan

The smaller a business is, the more its ideology will be focused around the ideas of one person. Many business owners are actually decent people who want to make their living accomplishing something useful. The larger a business grows, the larger the group of people that have input into the decision making. The more decision makers, the less agreement you get about goals. Eventually all goals but one become irrelevant -- the bottom line. Profit becomes the all-consuming goal of nearly every really large business, to the exclusion of any altruistic impulses.

This answer makes the most sense. Because in a large group of people, it's likely the only goal that they will all agree on is profit. So basically the "corporate person" is a simple minded troglodyte, whereas the founder was actually a human being that was more relate-able.

It's easier to relate to Superman than it is to relate to a large group of weaker vigilantes who wear collectively wear costumes, work together mostly, but also have 100 different goals. (Hence the reason so many Americans enjoy the fantasy stories about superheros like Superman.)

Sometimes distrust and scrutiny holds a mindless corporation to best behaviour. Example Microsoft.

Originally Posted by Pong

Sometimes distrust and scrutiny holds a mindless corporation to best behaviour. Example Microsoft.

HA HA HA HA HA!!
Never, especially when they are size and influence of Microsoft.

So we can trust our corporations as far as our ability to beat them down when they misbehave. Heaven help us if they ever get too big to beat them down (or "too big to fail").

Aren't people here missing the obvious answer? The bigger the target the more complaints, if a company has 'an empire' if you will (for example look at Oracle and Microsoft) it will be involved in more disputes and transactions and therefore attract more critics, not just by customers but also by rival companies.