As another commenter noted, Nespresso is a B Corp [1] and a subsidiary of Nestlé, which isn't traditionally thought of as a particularly "good" company, to put it gently [2].
My opinion of the B Corp designation, which has been heavily colored by founding + running a nonprofit full-time, is that it's mostly a marketing tool, and otherwise doesn't carry much weight. A common context I come across them in is offering services to nonprofits (ex [3] [4]), which they seem to do at approximately market rates in most cases.
In some ways (but certainly not all), I think the 501c3 process/designation puts stronger guardrails in place to make sure an organization isn't doing anything particularly terrible, by 1) limiting the financial upside to doing "bad" things, 2) removing the tax-exempt status if the org deviates too far from their stated mission (filed in a 1023 with the IRS) or receives too much money from the wrong places, and 3) forcing a bit of transparency by publishing 990s (the nonprofit yearly tax filing).
Many scholars note thay a B-corp is mostly a marketing strategy. There is little in B-corporate status that meaningfully differentiates from a traditional corporation, except to signal to customer and shareholders the intent of the firm to consider total stakeholder value.
This is the first I've become aware of B Corp and I like the idea.
I dug into what defines a B Corp. Notably the self-described "stringent" rules for becoming licensed. Pardon my ignorance, but it seems like a lot of regulatory checks to adhere to for keeping the company accountable? Seems.. like a lot of overhead.
I've been silently cheering on Teamshares.com over the past year hoping their idea catches on. I'm not sure if that's the same idea (emphasis being on employee ownership). But I'd be interested in hearing the account of others who have worked for a B Corp.
nness 689 days ago [-]
From a brand perspective, being a B Corp is certainly a positive for both the socially conscientious end-consumer and any sustainable organisations which want a B2B relationship.
That overhead is the extrinsic price you pay for B Corp status, and like any other organisation membership programme, I'm sure some organisations will eventually drop from the certification due to time or restriction on their trade. But that is actually desirable, if its valuable to you, you'll find a way for your organisation to do it. And if you can't meet those requirements, and drop/don't apply, then it only adds more value to those who do have the status.
I'm not aware of anything which makes B Corp a particularly new idea — there are a few membership programmes (or even corporate awards which require membership) which have sustainable or fair work requirements. Subjectively, I feel that B Corp is executed well and the brand value it provides, for the time being, is worthwhile for smaller organisations to consider.
zahma 689 days ago [-]
This site is a solid way of seeking work at a good company or being a responsible consumer.
When I was looking for work in environmental policy around 2016/18, I looked at this tool and it was sparsely populated. Now it feels like many companies have made attempts to conform to the standards, which is no simple feat, especially for multi-nationals.
It’s exciting to see alternate means of assessing value in a company. Such an evaluation is essential if we want to rethink classical economics and value companies who add value to their employees, the earth, or sustainable practices.
lapser 689 days ago [-]
> Now it feels like many companies have made attempts to conform to the standards, which is no simple feat, especially for multi-nationals.
You're right, actually conforming to the standard is no easy feat, but luckily, you can do the bare minimum[0] and continue your greenwashing processes.
Your comment is disingenuous. While there are certainly many businesses who do not undertake sustainability efforts in earnest or at all, we (as consumers) have to want companies to try. Otherwise they are even further disincentivized to make an effort. I agree that it’s a bad look when a Nestle company can obtain a B Corp score, but that’s not to discredit the entire program.
B Corp certifying makes a critical distinction for consumers. Is it a panacea for climate crises? Of course not. Will it single-handedly fix profit-incentivized business models that exploit natural resources? Of course not. It’s a start, and you shouldn’t assume that all companies undertaking its certification are merely greenwashing.
You could try to make the argument that enabling greenwashing is detrimental to them environmentalism effort, but then I’d have to get a sense for what you think is a meaningful step toward adjusting business practices.
yunwal 689 days ago [-]
> I agree that it’s a bad look when a Nestle company can obtain a B Corp score, but that’s not to discredit the entire program.
Can you explain why this shouldn't discredit the entire program? What distinction does b-corp certification actually make? I realize the point is it's supposed to signify that the corporation intends to make a positive impact, but clearly that's not actually a requirement.
robertlagrant 689 days ago [-]
> Will it single-handedly fix profit-incentivized business models that exploit natural resources?
It will do this not at all, indeed. It's the materials scientists and the VCs and the investors and the logisticians and the engineers who will solve the problems. B Corp is a marketing thing to allow companies to access middle class wallet share.
And fair enough; whatever differentiates you. But it's not going to solve anything.
lapser 688 days ago [-]
To be clear, I did not write my comment to discredit the entire system. B-Corp is certification is the best thing we have to make these decisions a little easier on the consumer.
I made the comment to make people aware that it should still be looked at with caution, as corporations are going to try to game the system.
wahnfrieden 689 days ago [-]
Your reply can be summarized as "even the biggest players are successfully abusing this to greenwash, but it's good"
msesen 689 days ago [-]
I've been trying to find a meaningful job at a BCorp or other socially/environmentally responsible company for a while.
Sadly, it doesn't seem like you get a lot of chances as a Software Engineer, since most of the corporations just offer services or physical products.
But beyond the ones matching that search, won’t most of them actually need IT oriented people even if they don’t explicitly say so?
no_wizard 689 days ago [-]
>But beyond the ones matching that search, won’t most of them actually need IT oriented people even if they don’t explicitly say so?
The pay is often substandard at organizations that consider software development IT in the first place
msesen 689 days ago [-]
Sadly none of them operating in Germany and/or don't have open roles.
I assumed so as well. I thought it would be an easy task to get a job in that sector, you know how it is as a SE. But it turns out a lot of those companies either do some form of (non-technical) consulting or offer actual physical products.
You don't need a guy doing backend stuff for tasks that a shopify page can solve.
dmarcian is one. I worked there for about 3 years. Good people.
mminer237 689 days ago [-]
It's a nice idea and website, but the structure seems very…nonideal. Why should this be governed by a private entity that they have to pay to monitor and recertify them? What's to stop a company from being "for society and the environment" until they get big enough to not care? As far as I can see, nothing's legally binding. At any point, the shareholders can just amend the bylaws to give up their little badge and do whatever makes them more money.
I think something like a benefit corporation or L3C is far more meaningful. Having all the capital legally tied into having society and the environment as beneficiaries thereof is way better than having a private company give you a little badge to advertise with as long as you do what they want.
0xffff2 689 days ago [-]
I looked into it a bit, and it seems that you probably need to be a benefit corporation or L3C to qualify for certification. For example, here's what they say for US/Deleware/Corporation on their legal requirement page [0]:
> Your company can meet the legal requirement for B Corp Certification by electing public benefit corporation status...
I am very much not a lawyer, but they go on to say existing corporations can transition to PBC status with a majority vote. I wonder whether the reverse is true. If so, there's no legal hurdle to pulling the same bait and switch you describe with a benefit corporation.
For anyone else who doesn't know what an L3C is, Google says it's L3C a low-profit limited liability company.
rchowe 689 days ago [-]
What always bothered me about "B corps" was that the name suggests something analogous to C corp or S corp, which in most states is not actually the case. I think my home state of Massachusetts does it well and labels them as "Public Benefit Corporations" instead of "B corps".
mminer237 689 days ago [-]
While I agree, those aren't the same thing.
C/S corporation status are two types of tax status for companies, whether regular corporations, benefit corporations, or even LLCs.
Benefit corporations are a type of corporation provided for by state law that has society and the environment as inherent beneficiaries of the company, along with the shareholders.
B corporations are a label B Lab (itself a not-for-profit corporation) gives to companies that comply with its ESG goals. It has nothing to do with its tax status or its legal obligations. B Labs requires amending the bylaws, but legally the shareholders are still supreme and there's nothing preventing the changes from being undone at any time.
I realize that that makes the name even more misleading though lol
thecosas 689 days ago [-]
It would be neat to have a feature that let you search for careers at these places as well. Maybe something on LinkedIn or another job search site?
I run two SMEs in Tourism, and as their size is small we opted years ago, to spend certification costs into CO2e offsetting. We use United Nations Sustainable Development Goals as a pillars for managing.
terminatornet 689 days ago [-]
for those looking for b corp jobs, i'm not sure if this is actually maintained
I wonder if it works like the ESG scores, where an oil company can score max results because it is ranked against peers, i.e. other oil companies.
unmole 689 days ago [-]
I apologise for a middlebrow dismissal but is there anything more to this than performative virtue signalling?
culi 689 days ago [-]
I actually kinda find them useful. The overall "B Corp certification" is just too easy to get imo, but they do have detailed breakdowns of scores in each of their 5 categories (Governance, Workers, Community, Environment, Customers). For example, you can look at this company page[0] and see that they don't have worker ownership or bonus points for certain environmental initiatives they take
In short, while the certification might not be the most useful, I think the comparative scores can be. I wonder if anyone's scraped the data already for projects
This looks all too similar to ESG: Taking arbitrary and subjective values and turning them into supposedly objective numbers.
culi 689 days ago [-]
The certification isn't just a vibe check. It's a very thorough rubric. The category names are the only thing that feels subjective
But you still have a valid point. Any rubric large and complex enough is gonna lead to room for subjectivity in what is and isn't looked at as thoroughly. I'm not at all saying it's 100% signal and no noise. Just that there is signal in there and could be useful to someone or just fun to play with for a side project/data visualization
tdonoghue 689 days ago [-]
Yes! There's money to be made in the certification of the performative virtue signaling.
My opinion of the B Corp designation, which has been heavily colored by founding + running a nonprofit full-time, is that it's mostly a marketing tool, and otherwise doesn't carry much weight. A common context I come across them in is offering services to nonprofits (ex [3] [4]), which they seem to do at approximately market rates in most cases.
In some ways (but certainly not all), I think the 501c3 process/designation puts stronger guardrails in place to make sure an organization isn't doing anything particularly terrible, by 1) limiting the financial upside to doing "bad" things, 2) removing the tax-exempt status if the org deviates too far from their stated mission (filed in a 1023 with the IRS) or receives too much money from the wrong places, and 3) forcing a bit of transparency by publishing 990s (the nonprofit yearly tax filing).
[1] https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/find-a-b-corp/company/nes...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9#Controversies_and_...
[3] https://www.wholewhale.com/
[4] https://www.fatbeehive.com/
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/205...
https://theconversation.com/b-corp-certification-wont-guaran...
https://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/how-mondragon-be...
I dug into what defines a B Corp. Notably the self-described "stringent" rules for becoming licensed. Pardon my ignorance, but it seems like a lot of regulatory checks to adhere to for keeping the company accountable? Seems.. like a lot of overhead.
I've been silently cheering on Teamshares.com over the past year hoping their idea catches on. I'm not sure if that's the same idea (emphasis being on employee ownership). But I'd be interested in hearing the account of others who have worked for a B Corp.
That overhead is the extrinsic price you pay for B Corp status, and like any other organisation membership programme, I'm sure some organisations will eventually drop from the certification due to time or restriction on their trade. But that is actually desirable, if its valuable to you, you'll find a way for your organisation to do it. And if you can't meet those requirements, and drop/don't apply, then it only adds more value to those who do have the status.
I'm not aware of anything which makes B Corp a particularly new idea — there are a few membership programmes (or even corporate awards which require membership) which have sustainable or fair work requirements. Subjectively, I feel that B Corp is executed well and the brand value it provides, for the time being, is worthwhile for smaller organisations to consider.
When I was looking for work in environmental policy around 2016/18, I looked at this tool and it was sparsely populated. Now it feels like many companies have made attempts to conform to the standards, which is no simple feat, especially for multi-nationals.
It’s exciting to see alternate means of assessing value in a company. Such an evaluation is essential if we want to rethink classical economics and value companies who add value to their employees, the earth, or sustainable practices.
You're right, actually conforming to the standard is no easy feat, but luckily, you can do the bare minimum[0] and continue your greenwashing processes.
[0] https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/find-a-b-corp/company/nes...
B Corp certifying makes a critical distinction for consumers. Is it a panacea for climate crises? Of course not. Will it single-handedly fix profit-incentivized business models that exploit natural resources? Of course not. It’s a start, and you shouldn’t assume that all companies undertaking its certification are merely greenwashing.
You could try to make the argument that enabling greenwashing is detrimental to them environmentalism effort, but then I’d have to get a sense for what you think is a meaningful step toward adjusting business practices.
Can you explain why this shouldn't discredit the entire program? What distinction does b-corp certification actually make? I realize the point is it's supposed to signify that the corporation intends to make a positive impact, but clearly that's not actually a requirement.
It will do this not at all, indeed. It's the materials scientists and the VCs and the investors and the logisticians and the engineers who will solve the problems. B Corp is a marketing thing to allow companies to access middle class wallet share.
And fair enough; whatever differentiates you. But it's not going to solve anything.
I made the comment to make people aware that it should still be looked at with caution, as corporations are going to try to game the system.
But beyond the ones matching that search, won’t most of them actually need IT oriented people even if they don’t explicitly say so?
The pay is often substandard at organizations that consider software development IT in the first place
I assumed so as well. I thought it would be an easy task to get a job in that sector, you know how it is as a SE. But it turns out a lot of those companies either do some form of (non-technical) consulting or offer actual physical products. You don't need a guy doing backend stuff for tasks that a shopify page can solve.
I think something like a benefit corporation or L3C is far more meaningful. Having all the capital legally tied into having society and the environment as beneficiaries thereof is way better than having a private company give you a little badge to advertise with as long as you do what they want.
> Your company can meet the legal requirement for B Corp Certification by electing public benefit corporation status...
I am very much not a lawyer, but they go on to say existing corporations can transition to PBC status with a majority vote. I wonder whether the reverse is true. If so, there's no legal hurdle to pulling the same bait and switch you describe with a benefit corporation.
0: https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/about-b-corps/legal-requi...
C/S corporation status are two types of tax status for companies, whether regular corporations, benefit corporations, or even LLCs.
Benefit corporations are a type of corporation provided for by state law that has society and the environment as inherent beneficiaries of the company, along with the shareholders.
B corporations are a label B Lab (itself a not-for-profit corporation) gives to companies that comply with its ESG goals. It has nothing to do with its tax status or its legal obligations. B Labs requires amending the bylaws, but legally the shareholders are still supreme and there's nothing preventing the changes from being undone at any time.
I realize that that makes the name even more misleading though lol
1. https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/find-a-b-corp/company/all...
https://www.bwork.com/
In short, while the certification might not be the most useful, I think the comparative scores can be. I wonder if anyone's scraped the data already for projects
[0] https://www.bcorporation.net/en-us/find-a-b-corp/company/ple...
But you still have a valid point. Any rubric large and complex enough is gonna lead to room for subjectivity in what is and isn't looked at as thoroughly. I'm not at all saying it's 100% signal and no noise. Just that there is signal in there and could be useful to someone or just fun to play with for a side project/data visualization