Defining American Business: What Makes a Company Truly American?

 The initial utterance of this frequently recited phrase was attributed to President Calvin Coolidge in a January 1925 address to newspaper editors. Coolidge, also known as "Silent Cal," served as president during the "Roaring Twenties," a period of accelerated economic growth that preceded the Great Depression and the resulting hardship and suffering.

The Coolidge-Reagan quote has been employed by numerous social and political commentators to argue that our society has deviated from its original mission, or purpose, by allocating resources to social programs when they should have been allocated to advancing the interests of business. A zero-sum perspective would posit that each dollar allocated to Head Start represents a dollar that could have been invested in business incentives or support, such as tax credits or subsidies. One argument posits that if we concentrate our attention, efforts, and resources on business, then all other matters will be resolved automatically. This is because increased economic development alleviates the ills of society, including poverty, access to healthcare, and adequate housing.

However, what was the actual meaning and context of President Coolidge's statement that "the business of America is business?"

In the first place, he did not explicitly state that "the business of America is business." Instead, he stated that the "primary concern of the American populace is commerce." It is possible to discern a more restricted interpretation of his actual words, which implies that our work is one of commerce. In other words, it is unlikely that Coolidge was advocating for the more comprehensive perspective that the interests of business should take precedence over those of other sectors of society, such as the provision of high-quality public education and affordable access to advanced education and healthcare, irrespective of one's economic status.

After his now-famous remarks, President Coolidge delivered the following portion of his speech: "Americans are unashamed about their desire for wealth; however, there are numerous other things that we desire that are significantly more valuable." We desire the strong elements of all civilization, which are peace, honor, and charity. Idealism is the foremost ideal of the American populace. I cannot emphasize this enough: America is a nation of idealists. That is the sole motivation to which they consistently respond in a robust and enduring manner. Coolidge continued to state:

"Certainly, the primary objective of life cannot be the accumulation of wealth." However, we are obligated to acknowledge it as a method of achieving nearly every desirable achievement. Wealth need not be feared to an extreme extent, provided that it is utilized as a means rather than an end.However, it necessitates an extra effort to prevent the mere appearance of selfishness-related evil.

It is evident that the original concept behind Coolidge's idea was to commend the business community and business leaders for their contributions to the economic prosperity of the United States and its citizens. However, it also seems that he did not subscribe to the notion that business, self-interest, and wealth accumulation are the sole factors that propel Americans and our society forward. Rather, the essence of American values is comprised of the higher ideals, including peace, honor, and charity.

I have come to the realization that business is the most effective method of advancing the interests of all individuals in our society and around the world over the course of my three decades in the business community. This encompasses the promotion of the interests of individuals who are not part of the business ecosystem, such as the impoverished, underserved, and marginalized, as we collectively contribute a portion of our personal success to the greater good. For instance, the expansion of businesses and globalization have resulted in a greater number of individuals emerging from extreme poverty than was previously anticipated. An estimated 250,000 individuals depart extreme poverty each day in search of a more respectable existence. An immense accomplishment, with the most challenging tasks yet to be completed.

However, the virtues and impact of business are only realized at the enterprise level when each enterprise is established on a foundation of shared values, such as integrity, fairness, and decency. The question that we must address as we commence 2017 is whether our leaders will abandon the principles that generate genuinely exceptional organizations in order to seize the financial opportunities presented by a "pro-business" administration.

I trust that the concept of being "pro-business" is not interpreted narrowly as necessitating a reduction in social commitments as I reflect on the words of President Coolidge, President Reagan, and our new President. On the contrary, we require additional business executives who consider the definition of success to encompass both the generation of profits and a significant contribution to the "higher ideals" of the 21st century. In addition to the early 20th century ideals of "peace, honor, and charity" that Coolidge cited, we can also incorporate tolerance, impartiality, and inclusion. In addition to shared prosperity for all individuals worldwide who aspire to become a part of our communities in pursuit of a more successful existence.

In the context of the President's executive order restricting the travel of refugees and citizens of specific Middle Eastern countries to the United States, there have been some encouraging developments in the past few days. The CEOs of numerous companies, including Starbucks, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Goldman Sachs, and Apple, have publicly expressed their opposition to any government policy that prohibits immigrants exclusively on the basis of religion or ethnicity. However, it will be necessary to determine whether this new CEO's "activism" is rooted in values and ideals or in apprehension regarding potential financial repercussions from restrictions on talent mobility across borders. Let us hope that it is a combination of the two.