Compared to CSR(corporate social responsibility), “shared value” was a relatively new approach of achieving social good through business. Instead of donating money to charity and taking a passive role in fostering social benefit, shared value places an emphasis on creating common values for both the societies and the business.

However, while Porter & Kramer stated in this article that the concept of shared value can “unleash the next wave of global growth” and further fix capitalism, another article published by Forbes is not so optimistic about that. Steven Denning, the contributor, stressed that in order to fix the holistic system of capitalism, bigger actions must be undertook.

Denning’s main argument is that the concept of “shared value” described by Porter and Kramer does not entail “customer capitalism”, which the power of buyers today is more effective than the power of sellers. In today’s business world, company have to position customer at its core of designing and manufacturing products. Nonetheless, Steven mentions that Porter and Kramer does not really touch on the customer aspects in the whole shared value concept. From”reconceiving products and markets”, “redefining productivity in the value chain”, to “enabling local cluster development”, none of them shows a strong emphasis on understanding customers’ problems or finding possible solutions in response to them.

So let’s get back to the question. If the current concept of “shared value” does not fix the problems of capitalism, how can it be revised to make a greater impact? Denning pointed out that “delighting customers” is one of the most important factors needed to be involved in the concept of shared values. For example, Maxine mentioned that the Japanese-based company MUJI left their paper products unbleached so that production cost decreased and customers enjoy a lower price. Maxine’s perspective on how MUJI “makes customers feel that they enjoy additional benefit” has supported the importance of delighting customers when implementing shared values.

Additionally, MUJI’s products are classic examples of disruptive innovation. Miranda mentioned in her post that MUJI creates a value proposition which solves customers pain-being over-served and over-charged. The products are less sophisticated than most of the substitutes in the marketplace, yet well-functioned and aesthetically intriguing in its simple style. I would heartily agree on Miranda’s opinion that simplicity serves both the customers and the society well. While consumers’ needs are satisfied, the minimized packaging and decoration of products have reduced carbon footprint and potential waste.

The story of MUJI and Denning’s argument have proposed that shared values are more to changes within a company’s production line. In conclusion, considering customers’ taste, opinions, pain, and creating potential gain is vital to a company’s success of exercising shared values.

Word Count: 442