Most owners, however, simply want a decent return on their investment. Most employees of whatever level, including the CEO, simply want to be able to make a living and be rewarded for their services, including getting paycheck, perks and bonuses, and access to health benefits and retirement plans. Those aren’t evil things. It’s not evil to pursue those things.

As I see it, customers have a right to receive the goods and services they agreed to for the price they agree to pay, and employees are only entitled to receive whatever they’ve agreed to exchange their services for. An owner has a right to pursue return on investment. A corporation needs to be reasonably responsive to the needs of its customers, or they will go elsewhere. It needs to offer employees comparable or better payoffs and working conditions than they could find elsewhere or provide for themselves, or they will leave the company. It also needs to offer owners some form of satisfaction with their investment, or they will sell their ownership to someone else, possibly someone who will dismantle the corporation.

All businesses have to make money to survive, unless they are to be subsidized by the government or to be considered a very expensive hobby by an owner. Corporations are expected to give their owners (shareholders) some of the profit via dividends, and expected to grow in value, allowing the owner to sell their ownership to someone else at a profit.

Disney Is Different
Make no mistake, The Walt Disney Company is a business, a shareholder corporation that needs to make money. That being said, there should also be no mistake made that Disney is “different.�?. It should be different. It needs to be different. Being different is a large part of what has kept it alive, independent, and successful all of these years. The name is a valuable one that has meant -and still means- many good things to many people. None of this excuses the Company from the realities of corporations that I’ve listed above. It simply provides a compass to use to guide the corporation forward.

The Company might be able to make more money by manufacturing alcohol, pornography, cigarettes, weapons, human clones, and operating casinos (and, mind you, I’m not saying all of those things are evil - just controversial, profitable businesses that the Company has avoided) – but then it wouldn’t be Disney. Disney makes family films. Disney makes family theme parks. Disney publishes books and music.

But Disney is more than just the kinds of businesses it is in. It has been different for how in conducts business - the quality, the innovation, the consistency, the promotion from within, and customer service.

It’s not evil to let things slip, unless it kills someone, but it is a shame. It is certainly wrong to misrepresent yourself. If a company is going to use the good name of someone to further itself, if corporate leaders and owners are going to use that name to further and enrich themselves, they should at least be true to that name. They aren’t legally required to, but they are morally obligated. To use the Disney name but do things antithetical to that name is evil.

Permit me to take you back to the topic of evil corporations.

“Okay, So the Concept of a Corporation Isn’t Evil, But Many Still Are�?
If you agreed with my point earlier in the column where I make the case that the concept of a corporation isn’t evil, allow me to explain when individual corporations are evil and when they aren’t.

Why do people think corporations are evil (and are those reasons valid for declaring a corporation evil)?