Podcast Summary: New Books Network

Episode: Colin Mayer, "Capitalism and Crises: How to Fix Them" (Oxford UP, 2024)
Date: January 22, 2026
Host: Alfred Marcus (B)
Guest: Prof. Colin Mayer (C), Emeritus Professor of Management Studies at Saïd Business School, Oxford

Overview

This episode features Professor Colin Mayer discussing his latest book, Capitalism and Crises: How to Fix Them. The conversation explores how current capitalist models foster recurring economic, social, and environmental crises. Mayer argues for a reorientation of corporate purpose toward "profitable solutions to the problems of people and planet" rather than profitability from creating those problems. The dialogue covers moral principles for business, pitfalls of 'purpose-washing', regulatory and ownership reforms, the role of reputation and technology, ‘sin’ industries, implications for business education, and prospects for capitalism in different political contexts.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Mayer’s Background & Motivation for the Book (02:41–06:00)

• Colin Mayer’s experience: Financial economist, founding professor and former dean at Oxford’s Saïd Business School. Led the British Academy’s “Future of the Corporation” program and Scotland’s commission on corporate purpose.
• Motivation: Previous works helped bring “corporate purpose” mainstream, but purpose devolved into marketing, eroding trust through “woke capitalism” and purpose-washing.
  • Quote:

    “…by getting a purpose, what they meant was … a marketing slogan and campaign for looking good… It wasn’t therefore something that was authentic…” (C, 04:30)

• Aim of the book: Diagnose why corporate purpose has failed authentically, and prescribe structural and moral reforms.

2. The “Moral Law” – Profit Without Harm (06:00–12:20)

• Golden Rule revisited: Mayer highlights the ‘negative’/Confucian version—"Do not do unto others what they would not want done unto them”—as a basis for a “moral law” for business.
• Profit without harm: Business equivalent of the Hippocratic Oath—firms must not profit by causing harm, must internalize costs of cleanup/mitigation.
• Competitive necessity: Without a ‘profit without harm’ principle, responsible businesses are outcompeted by less scrupulous ones—a “Gresham’s law” of bad firms driving out the good.
  • Quote:

    “Profit without harm is what I regard as being the business equivalent of the Hippocratic oath in medicine. Do no harm… business should not profit from doing [harm].” (C, 08:00)

3. Concrete Examples: Tech Giants & Purpose–Washing (13:29–19:56)

• Google/Alphabet & “Do No Harm”: Founded with positive intentions—to democratize data—but faces issues of monopoly, privacy, and new harms as it scales.
• Facebook/Meta: Set out to connect the world, but creates “tremendous problems” (mental health, privacy, hate speech), with insufficient acknowledgment or remediation.
  • Quote:

    “…in the case of Facebook and Meta, there’s been little if any acknowledgement by the company of the problems that it’s occurring and acceptance of its responsibility for cleaning up the mess…” (C, 18:36)

• Lesson: Purpose is a process—identify problems to solve, profit from solving, and take responsibility for unintended harms.

4. Balancing Voluntary Ethics and Regulation (21:11–26:24)

• Carrots and sticks: Incentives (e.g., government procurement requiring ethical corporate purposes), not just regulation, are needed. Voluntary action alone is unlikely; alignment of interests is essential.
• Ownership alignment: The interests of owners/shareholders must align with ethical, problem-solving purposes for real reform.
  • Quote:

    “Companies will not do this sort of thing unless there is either an incentive for doing them or a repercussion from them not doing it.” (C, 21:13)

• Examples: Licenses, public–private partnerships, and procurement can enforce purpose alignment.

5. Ownership Structures: The Danish Model (27:19–37:18)

• Contrast with Anglo-Saxon model: Most companies worldwide have dominant block-holders (often families or foundations), not just dispersed shareholders.
• Enterprise Foundations: Danish model (e.g., Novo Nordisk)—controlled by charitable foundations—nurtures long-termism and alignment between profits and solving societal problems.
  • Quote:

    “…those companies not only have a focus on the long term… but also the objective of that owner is not simply to promote the well being of the family… it’s to promote the charitable objective of the foundation…” (C, 31:00)

• Novo Nordisk Case: Despite massive stock price shakeups, the foundation structure helped maintain long-term resilience and a clear, purpose-driven North Star.

6. Shareholders, Public Policy & Legal Structures (37:18–43:51)

• Legal context: US/UK law doesn’t prevent foundation ownership or purposeful objectives, but policy emphasis is on minority investor protection, often at the cost of alternative models.
• Regulatory implication: It's not ownership forms per se, but misaligned priorities that obstruct ethical, long-term capitalism.

7. Institutional Investors & Private Equity (45:30–55:32)

• Pension/endowment funds: These naturally have long-term horizons, and sustainability is in their interest.
  • Quote:

    "...pension funds have beneficiaries… who have a very long term horizon. …The natural focus ... is to create returns ... but to ensure ... that the returns ... are indeed over the long term." (C, 45:45)

• Private equity: Rising dominance of private ownership (less transparent, more short-term) poses challenges. Successful long-term models blend stock market liquidity with stable, purposeful large owners.

8. Reputational Risk, Ratings & Technology (55:32–59:12)

• Reputation: Increasingly pivotal—social media can erode value swiftly, often more powerfully than regulation.
• Technology’s role: Satellite/AI/blockchain/social media enable transparency, traceability, and pressure for ethical conduct.
  • Quote:

    “One of the greatest concerns that afflicts boardrooms ... is the risk of a social media campaign ... that can erode immense amounts of stock market value overnight...” (C, 56:17)

9. Sin Stocks, Food, & Problem Industries (60:27–64:00)

• Food industry: Faces mounting parallels with tobacco—profit from processed foods now seen as ‘sin stocks’ due to health effects.
  • Quote:

    “...the food industry is increasingly realizing that it risks becoming the next cigarette industry.” (C, 61:00)

• Advice: Denial and PR spin (tobacco approach) is doomed; real acknowledgment and addressing of harms is essential.

10. Reforming (and Critiquing) Business Schools (64:39–68:44)

• Current failings: Business schools still teach shareholder primacy as foundation; lag behind real business needs.
• Calls for curriculum reform: Start with “What is the purpose of business?” and let all disciplines flow from purpose as problem-solving, not just maximizing profit.
  • Quote:

    “...it should start off by posing the question, what is the purpose of business?... why do they exist? What is their reason for being?...” (C, 65:20)

• Value to students and employers: Problem-solving businesses are most attractive to future leaders, recruiters, and investors.

11. Optimism, Global Trends, and Democracy (69:03–74:06)

• Implementation focus: Mayer now seeks to spread adoption of these principles to corporations, governments, and investors.
• Optimism: Despite US sociopolitical divides, other regions (Europe, China) are keenly moving forward with ethical capitalism.
  • Quote:

    “…technology is really helping rapidly to make this a reality. …other countries… recognize as a fantastic opportunity to occupy [the ESG] space…” (C, 70:20)

• China versus West: China’s problem-solving focus is impressive—run by engineers versus lawyers in the US—but Mayer rejects autocracy as a solution.
• Saving democracy: Reforming capitalism is vital to support functioning democracies, not undermine them.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On corporate purpose and marketing:
  “It wasn’t therefore something that was authentic to the business. Turned out that often companies had adopted so called corporate purposes without even getting their board's consent to doing that.” (C, 04:30)
• On profit without harm:
  “Profit without harm is what I regard as being the business equivalent of the Hippocratic oath in medicine. Do no harm.” (C, 08:00)
• On company examples:
  “...in the case of Facebook and Meta, there's been little if any acknowledgement by the company of the problems that it's occurring and acceptance of its responsibility for cleaning up the mess that it's creating.” (C, 18:36)
• On family and foundation ownership:
  “...family ownership of even the largest firms is the most dominant form of ownership around the world. And state ownership is another form... Especially, Denmark's enterprise foundations demonstrate the alignment of purpose with long-term performance.” (C, 29:20)
• On reputational risk:
  “One of the greatest concerns that afflicts boardroom discussions is the risk of a social media campaign against a company that can erode immense amounts of stock market value overnight.” (C, 56:17)
• On business schools:
  “...it should start off by posing the question, what is the purpose of business? Why do we create businesses? ...And if businesses do that, they don't undermine their ability to be able to attract students or to place them in the highest paying jobs, they do exactly the opposite.” (C, 65:20)
• On optimism:
  “I'm extremely optimistic, if only because... the direction of travel in terms of what people see as being the objectives are shifting very much in this direction.” (C, 70:07)
• On China and the future of democracy:
  “What I am seeking to do is to provide a mechanism by which capitalism can ensure that democracies survive. …one of the reasons for promoting this agenda is that I think that the way in which business is currently being run is posing immense problems for our democratic system.” (C, 72:36 & 72:50)

Timestamped Guide to Key Segments

• Introduction & Motivation (02:41–06:00)
• Moral Law / Profit Without Harm (06:00–12:20)
• Company Examples: Tech Giants (13:29–19:56)
• Voluntary Ethics vs. Regulation (21:11–26:24)
• Ownership Structures & Foundation Model (27:19–37:18)
• Governance & Legal Structures (37:18–43:51)
• Pension Funds, Endowments, Private Equity (45:30–55:32)
• Reputation, Ratings, Technology (55:32–59:12)
• Sin Industries & Food (60:27–64:00)
• Business School Reform (64:39–68:44)
• What’s Next & Optimism (69:03–71:19)
• China, Democracy, and Systemic Reform (71:19–74:06)

Conclusion

Colin Mayer’s Capitalism and Crises issues a compelling, pragmatic, and optimistic call to re-anchor business around the purpose of solving—not creating—societal problems. Drawing on moral philosophy, global ownership patterns, and practical reforms, Mayer advocates for structural alignment of purpose at all levels of business and policy. The episode argues for systemic reforms involving ownership, regulation, incentives, and business education, supporting the eventual transformation of capitalism to serve people and planet without sacrificing democracy or long-term prosperity.