I've posted before on the idea of the B Corp as a way of doing capitalism differently, so its now interesting to see the BLab which oversees the designation is raising the thresholds for recertification (which is required every three years).
This is being presented as a response to complaints about some firms gaming the system to retain their certification but a ratcheted rise in thresholds serves the purpose of raising the ethical standards further.
The central criticism of the B-Corp format from within the social enterprise movement is precisely that companies can pass into, and out of it relatively easily - in comparison to say co-operatives or community interest companies, which are legally regulated and have permanent ownership restrictions built in, rather than just changeable commitments to ethical behaviour.
As with many environmental commitments, such as carbon off-setting, or 'CSR' - commitments supervised in corporate marketing departments rather than shaping the values of every department - in other words seen by top management more as image than substance - B-Corp status can easily slip into public pose rather than real social or environmental responsibility.
This is one perspective. Personally, I welcome all efforts to move business even a little bit away from 'shareholder value' as the single aim - and I reject any 'single model' solutions to this that simply divides those unhappy with disaster-capitalism.
yes, I'm with your final paragraph - it may not be sufficient but the B Corps are one part of that (necessary) shift
Emeritus Prof Christopher May
Grant
GeofCox