The purpose of this paper is to go over the true goals of any business company and prove that, when reached, they contribute not only to human development and economic dynamism which, in a climate of social peace so longed and needed by Latin America, but without sacrificing the legitimate own good, even material, of each company, it ensures its stability and future.

This paper’s plan may call the attention of some, but please consider that, on one hand, Dr. J. Lagarrigue has already undertaken a similar study, based upon the needs of macro- economy, and, on the other, the American magazine “Fortune”  by discussing the motivation of business activities, incidentally proves that a company’s goals – considered as absolute “theory” by some “practical” men – is something with very specific consequences, even related to the development and better use of human and material resources of a nation.

 In fact, the goals determine decisions made by men and, eventually, govern their conduct. Only when the goals propose to the shared activity of a group of men are chosen skillfully, relations among them may be healthy and harmonious. The end should guide us in choosing the means, so if the end is not properly chosen, even the best conceived structures fail to attain their purpose. Today this is particularly important, as one of the most violent paradoxes posed by the contemporary world is the contrast between the extraordinary profusion of the means and the desolating indigence of ends.

This wealth of means and power of action in the hands of humanity deprived of the sense of things and the knowledge of the true end of their actions engenders confusion and obstacles to achieving a better world

Section 282 of the Argentine Commercial Code – and both the Chilean and Latin American peers take an almost identical stance - says: “A company or business association is a contract whereby two or more people associate, sharing their property and industry, or either of these things, in order to do business, and to distribute any profits arising therefrom”. As none of these laws defines what a company is, the aforesaid is usually considered.

In addition, usually a company is conceived as being exclusively created by the owners of the means of production, who are the only ones entitled to every right of management and disposition, and engage in a working relationship with employees for the sole purpose of getting their support in order to operate such means of production.

 This notion resulted in two consequences: on one hand, if the company consists of only two businessmen-capitalists, it’s logical for it to act based on the sole purpose of earning the maximum benefit for them; on the other hand, if workers are mere external collaborators of the company, it's natural that there is an economic-social tension between them and the owners of the means of production.

In a notion such as this one, it’s no surprise for work to be considered as merchandise, as a “cost factor”, without stopping to analyze the gift of the spirit that heightens and characterizes any human action: it’s seen as something purely material, unconscious, reduced to  the level  of a  machine,  of something exclusively executive. The  common  expression “labor” is very expressive in this sense.

The fact that in most cases workers are not mistreated is attributed to feelings of humanity and not to a clear notion of the true nature of a company.

The result of this false notion is for the same company organization to tend to consider workers as a mere gear assembly, without giving them the chance to know, understand and perceive by themselves the pulse of the company in which they are involved; furthermore, in fact, it prevents men from developing themselves through their work.

It should not be surprising if workers go to work without any goal other than to earn money, and to execute the work without considering it “their work” and without feeling, as an individual, related to it, and  least of all, to the company. Lacking any chance of “participation”, the fact that they fail to contribute to the company their intelligence and heart, man's most priced attributes, should not be surprising.

This notion  of  company  could  be  summarized   as  follows:  pure  individualism; materialism; social relationships based solely on the search for a benefit and exclusively reduced to claiming rights and duties. The resulting social tension is a tension by opposition.

2.- Reality Overview:

The facts, however, as evidenced by everyday experience and on which, even advocates of the above-mentioned notion, have made the “anatomy” of the modern company, show a richer and more complex reality:

a) The company is an economic reality which presents itself as a system of resources (work, capital, technical knowledge, etc.) organized in order to produce and sell goods or services in a larger environment, the market.

b) The company is also a human reality, which presents itself as an organized relationship of men, among themselves and with the company, integrated in a hierarchical order and with pre-established duties according to the company’s economic goals.

c) In addition, the company is a “legal” reality, which appears as a member of a system of relationships external to it which relate it to a body of larger entities and social forces (the State, Employer Chambers, Unions, public opinion, etc.).

All of them are true and real aspects of a same entity: the company.

In spite of that, the legal life of a company continues within the framework of right to property conceived in line with the above-mentioned notion and, let us add this, “heavy inheritance of the mistakes of an unfair economic system which has exercised its ruinous influx for several generations”, has contributed to this other aspect of the contemporary reality: concentration of economic power in a few hands, unfair distribution of goods, instability of economic life, easy chances for speculation, legal provisions favoring anonymity and dilute moral responsibility, simplicity to earn money through the exploitation of the less noble trends of consumers and, generally speaking, a state of economic dependence and lack of safety  favoring depersonalization and “massification” of men, with the resulting divisions and hatred, and incidentally offering - as anything putting an obstacle to the development of human personality - great permeability to communism.

TRUE NOTION OF A BUSINESS COMPANY

a) Nature:

The business company is an institution particular to, and fundamental to, any industrial society, which, in addition to centralizing and organizing the activities of men with the purpose of accommodating land resources to human needs, has proven to be the only form of economic organization able to ensure full achievement of work.

For this reason, and because the difference in the economic development between the countries having or lacking this kind of organization is so big, we are interested in discussing its nature.

Among the institutions to which a person may voluntarily affiliate, we must make a distinction between an “association” (such as a club, a religious society, etc. ...) where people relate directly, and an “economic unity” where men are related by means of an exchange of contributions (material goods or forces similar to material services).

The company belongs to the latter, i.e., it is not an association of people where everyone would have rights only as people, due to their mere condition of men, (as is the case in a family or political society), but in a company, personal rights are proportional to everyone’s contribution to the production process; everyone makes a material contribution and maintains the ownership thereof. This means that some contribute the means of production and own them, and others their work, but do not transfer it, because work, as the Church teaches us, is inseparable from the person of the worker and it cannot be transferred (otherwise, slavery would be legitimate).

That’s why, no one can consider himself as owner of the company in the same way as of the house where he lives: a company is obviously not as “private” as "my house".

In short, a company should not be considered as being made-up only by the owners of the means of production, but as a production unit, where the constituent elements (contributors of Work and contributors of  Capital) relate to each other through several contributions and where mutual respect should be ensured by the structure of the company itself.

Read More 20 pages
http://www.thaicatholicbiz.com/v18/pdf/The_Business_Company-It's_nature_Goals_and_economic_development_Enrique_Shaw.pdf