NEW:  SquareWell Partners  discusses the results of a survey of investors’ views on the relevance of the concept of corporate purpose in Making Corporate Purpose Tangible – A Survey of Investors.

Bernard Sharfman responds to On the Purpose of the Corporation, which proposes a corporate purpose requiring “lawful and ethical conduct” and permitting consideration of stakeholder interests, as ignoring social value created by profitable businesses and relying on a pretextual relationship between institutional investors and management, in A Fuller Sense of Corporate Purpose: A Reply to Martin Lipton’s ‘on the Purpose of the Corporation’.

Skadden responds to On the Purpose of the Corporation, which proposes a corporate purpose requiring “lawful and ethical conduct” and permitting consideration of stakeholder interests, noting that the proposed purpose risks loss of director protection under the business judgment rule in An Alternative Paradigm to “On the Purpose of the Corporation”.

Can a Broader Corporate Purpose Redress Inequality? criticizes current debate on stakeholderism as a distraction from the more important issue of inequality, arguing that corporate directors and officers back stakeholderism because it allows them to retain control, and that regulation, rather than corporate governance, is needed to address inequality.

Should Corporations Have a Purpose? argues that current debate regarding corporate purpose bypasses questions of whether and why corporations should have a purpose, explores theoretical, historical, and practical reasons for corporate purpose, and concludes that corporate purpose should be understood — as a default protecting expectancy interests — as maximizing economic value; but that pursuit of long-term economic value requires managers to consider the effects of corporate operations on stakeholders and society.

More on corporate purpose describes Professor Dalia Tsuk Mitchell’s article From Dodge to eBay: The Elusive Corporate Purpose.