jen briggs

I have been in the human behavior field for more than twenty years now. I love the energy behind Bcorp, employee ownership, and purpose driven companies. I love that more consumers are considering where the profits go before they make a purchase. But, is this all a new, progressive business movement or is it more traditional, branded better or sexier?

As an undergrad in Community Health, I was fortunate to be able to complete three practicum’s, basically short internships. My first was with a county health department that served a largely rural area with significant poverty. A small town was having a community health crisis, and I was sent in as part of a team to investigate, diagnose and propose some remedies. The short story is that it was a sad, systemic situation for the youth and a great learning experience for me.

My next practicum was with a large agricultural business with more than 1,000 employees. Even in the 1980’s, this family controlled, public company had the insight to have a health service available to their employees. This business was tough work and they wanted to take care of people. They knew that healthy employees = productive company. This company noticed a rise in attendance issues and I was put on the case to find out if there was a pattern behind it. I did find a pattern with newborn care deficiencies and we created a program in an effort to help.

My final assignment was at a large family run brewery. This company was working on some initial research to open a fitness center for its employees. I was able to help find some early fitness, wellness, and human productivity statistics that could be added to the business case.

Along my way in life, I would hear stories of my grandfather, who I never really knew. He was active in the community and gave support where he could as a business owner. Farmers and former employees would talk about how good he was to them. For rural towns, the interdependence between main street employers, their employees, and their customers was critical. They all needed one another. There was no remote work-from-home abstractness to where one lives compared to where one works. Our technology, infrastructure, and economics were not where they were now and the town was as a center for life, work, and relationships.

These formative experiences were so influential to my thinking. I learned there is an interconnectivity and a reciprocal relationship between every aspect of a community that determines its health. Most importantly, I learned the powerful and critical impact that an employer has on their community. I am very thankful for our social services and what they do to help keep people from drowning. But, businesses were helping people become the best version of themselves while reaping the rewards of higher productivity. It was a win-win. Health, pride, valuable commerce, and belonging were created simply through the act of working and holistic, system thinking. Or perhaps, at times, it was not that complex, and it was simply a desire to do the right thing.

This isn’t to say these companies and my grandfather were perfect. In certain cases, I’m confident they weren’t. But, there was this proximity between the family management, their employees and their community that brought accountability and the desire to try and try harder. To do and do better. There was never a goal to suck every ounce of profit out of the system to feed a faceless external shareholder. No desire to satiate an abstract owner who may or may not be reinvesting their personal dollars back to the company. That is harsh and I also believe there are high road public companies and there should be more high road investors who recognize a triple bottom line and the long-term value of reinvestment into people. It was these early lessons that cemented my decision to focus on community health, now organizational health, in private industry.

Working at New Belgium was fantastic because I found a place that also got it. Like the large family run agricultural company and the large family-owned brewery (yes, it is a coincidence), they intuitively knew that if we were good as individuals, we would be better together and able to produce great work for the consumer. In so many ways, I feel like this is a more traditional way of leading a company. Jack Stack once told me about the power of recycling the dollars in the community. I also know when we spend money with an employee owned, Bcorp or purpose driven companies they can reinvest the profits in ways that consider more than just external shareholder dividend or value growth expectations. They are allowed to think more holistically and help shape a positive future.

Perhaps it was the democratization of stock-day-trading through the internet that started the reductive bottom line thinking. But, I think this singular thinking isolating one measure of short term focused success is more of a modern effect. I believe it is more traditional to consider the community as a stakeholder and a symbiotic longer term scorecard measuring the wins. Unions did a great job of helping to correct the short-slightness of labor treatment during the industrial revolution. Like the unions did for manual labor, I think purpose based, employee owned and Bcorps can do the same for the new knowledge economy.

Is it traditional or progressive? No matter, these types of companies are more rewarding and mutually beneficial in a real way regardless of label. They will take a right path. Perhaps a path to even more employee owned businesses? That is what matters.