Corporate altruism is part of the solution.

Like many neighbourhoods, my street has set up a dedicated Covid-19 WhatsApp group with people offering practical help and support to each other. Yesterday, someone needed a thermometer to check their temperature so one neighbour left one on their doorstep with some disinfectant swabs for afterwards. Another neighbour put out the bins for a resident who is elderly and immobile.

Heart warming, kind and generous gestures. But also deeply logical, self-caring and self-interested. Why? Because when we do something for others in this way today, part of us knows that it might pay off tomorrow when we need help. And in the interim, it helps us feel good about ourselves and feel useful, something that is especially important in a time of crisis.

Is anyone altruistic?

There’s nothing wrong with these underlying motives for generous acts. We’re social animals with emotional needs, and part of us also recognises the importance of protecting the tribe. The stronger our immediate group, the safer we are individually. This isn’t bleeding heart liberal sentimentality, it’s simple social psychology and pragmatism.

Psychological research debates whether altruism actually exists — altruism being defined as “when we act to promote someone else’s welfare, even at a risk or cost to ourselves”. The research quickly gets into discussion of differing motives, some known and some hidden, and debate around the desire underpinning our actions (including defining what desire is in the first place).

Aristotle argued that altruism should always have some level of self-interest. Darwin speculated that altruism was a form of species protection. Nietzsche, meanwhile, felt that treating others as more important than yourself was degrading and demeaning. One thing that seems common, at least, is that the underlying motive doesn’t matter — it’s what benefit or good is created overall.

Right now, we’re seeing many companies undertake acts that may seem subjectively ‘good’, or ‘generous’ or ‘beneficial’ — donations of large sums of money, repurposing plant and machinery, offering discounts and free goods to key workers. If we hold true the perspective of wiser beings like Aristotle, whether these companies are doing it for the right reasons then becomes irrelevant; what matters is that there’s an overall benefit.

We need more ecosystem thinking.

My contention though, is that we’re not seeing nearly enough altruism, nor the right form of altruism. One of the simplest examples of altruism in business is the ‘ecosystem’, a term popularised by the startup scene. It simply expresses the idea that a group of early-stage companies supporting each other and acting with some shared values and cohesion, gives the entire population a greater chance of survival and success — again, like protecting the integrity of a tribe or animal group.

In startup ecosystems, companies help each other through behaviours and activities designed for mutual gain over time: free or discounted goods and services for each other, organising events and communications to reinforce the community, sharing learnings and intellectual property that can benefit everyone (without weakening the individual company).

This principle of cooperation, particularly in the time of economic crisis, should not be limited to early-stage or small businesses. Many larger companies are the only ones right now that have the resources and security to maintain communities and ecosystems — and it’s in their interests to do so. With a situation this stark, the more businesses that can be supported in some way to stay solvent, the better it will be for everyone. No-one can sell their goods and services if their customers are out of business.

For example, the growth of corporate venturing has seen bigger businesses clamour to partner with startups who can provide innovation and talent that isn’t feasible inside larger organisation structures. Therefore, there should be strong self-interest motives to support these ecosystems.

The best price point in this market.

How can large organisations do this? Well, the most underused price point in business is zero. That’s right — free. Large (and small) organisations often overlook what they can give away for free that costs them nothing or very little, but can provide huge benefits in the short-term and extremely valuable goodwill and positioning in the long-term.

Many large organisations won’t be making redundancies but the chances are, their workforce will have a little less to do in this economy. So one example would be utilising any spare capacity to provide free advice and support to other businesses — big or small. Organise groups and community events to understand what challenges are being faced and how the crowd could help. Enable your customers to talk to each other with tools and platforms. Postpone any non-essential payments due and pay in advance or buy additional services — for instance, by accelerating projects that have been on hold but will deliver benefit in the long-term.

You’re not just doing this for them out of the goodness of your corporate heart, you’re doing it for your business prospects and that’s just fine. Think of it as a ‘supplier viability hedge’.

What does macro altruism look like?

‘Bailout’ and ‘too big to fail’ are two of the most well-known terms in modern business. During the 2008 financial crisis (and prior to that), the argument was that allowing the biggest banks to go bankrupt would trigger a catastrophic economic collapse. Whatever side of the argument you sit on, the banks were bailed out and we’re all still here (just). Now, governments are again providing bailouts, albeit directly to businesses and indirectly to individuals. This is absolutely essential to keep not just businesses, but people afloat and solvent. Where we are now is ‘too many to fail’.

Too many to fail is important because the more people there are without jobs and money, the less that can be spent on goods and services, and the lower the tax revenue in the medium term, and on and on goes the spiral. Apologies for simplifying the economics but this flow of money is particularly important this time around because of the sheer unprecedented scale of impact, a situation where GDP in the US may contract by 30% in the next quarter.

The question then is, who does have liquid reserves right now? Who could help to avoid this species-level ecosystem from collapsing? For that, I’ll leave you with this unapologetically angry thought.

The five biggest companies in the world are Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway, Alphabet, Apple and Facebook. Collectively, they are sitting on over half-a-trillion dollars of cash reserves. Roughly $540 billion dollars. In CASH. Extend it to the top ten biggest companies, and there’s roughly $720 billion dollars in the most liquid asset available. Doing absolutely nothing.

What good is all that money if your customers, suppliers and communities are going out of existence?

Thanks for reading ????

Sign up to my weekly newsletter for a short, curated selection of interesting articles, blogs and podcasts: https://www.getrevue.co/profile/jindy-mann

https://medium.com/@jindymann