Organization

In this essay, we argue that the recent financial collapse, the ensuing recession and the work of key social movements have created conditions for a reengagement of critically-inclined organizational theorists with various forms of value analysis. We then introduce the seven articles in this special issue and highlight how each makes a contribution to this reengagement.

The contemporary significance of branding as a source of value is explored by situating the creation and valorization of brand equity within ‘the full circuit of capital’. Conceived as a form of co-production occurring in the sphere of circulation (as well as production), brand-building is connected to: the surpluses generated by the labour of user-consumers as well as the designers and producers of branded products and services; the realization of surplus through control of revenues derived from sales of these products and services and the appropriation of surpluses, including the conversion of brand equity into brand value after deduction of costs. Contemporary investment in branding is related to the financialization of brands as intangibles that make a growing contribution to market capitalization. By attending to multiple facets of the circuit of capital, including the co-production brand equity by user-consumers, some pointers are proposed for developing a more ‘joined-up’ view of the ‘bigger picture’ of contemporary capitalist reproduction.

This article returns to the issue of how ownership matters. It does so by developing a critique of the ‘advantage-value-return’ framework of assumptions about value creation from the product market, which are recurrent in resource based strategy and many other discourses that highlight what managers can do and the variable governance of management by owners. It then uses a case analysis of private equity and presents empirics which show how the financier general partners capture value so that general partners are enriched regardless of the performance of their investment funds. While private equity publicly claims to represent ownership with control for strategic decision making and operating efficiency, the undisclosed generic business model is the control of ownership through constructing a hierarchy of ownership claims for debt and equity suppliers in the capital market. Before or after the financial crisis that began in 2007, what matters is the position of the general partner as first among owners, not the motives, identity and actions of managers or the different suppliers of debt and equity.

This article explores Fairtrade minimum price setting as an organizational formulation of a critical response to economic liberalism and its underlying notion of value—a subjective theory of value. The aim of the article is to show what happens if such meta-level philosophical debates on fairness and markets are lived out organizationally. This is achieved by using an ethnographic study of the price setting process of the Fairtrade Labelling Organizations. The case unpacks the complexities of defining a ‘fair’ price beyond the principle of marginal utility. I draw on French pragmatist sociology in order to decompose the political and moral constructions that underpin the organizational practices of minimum price setting. Challenging the assumption of free choice in neo-classical economics, Fairtrade redefines not only how value should be calculated, but also what it is it that should be valued and who values. This makes visible the political confrontation at the point of price determination, notably by providing a social arena for where conflicts of interest between opposing parties are played out. Once the producer enters price formation processes as a person and not only as the alienable owner of a commodity, the social, political and ecological and relations of production come to the fore that are otherwise concealed through the spontaneous market mechanism.

Beginning in the late 1980s, casinos became a favoured neoliberal economic development strategy for cash-strapped states and municipalities. During the same time period, the political power and profitability of the gaming industry increased, while opposition from communities grew. A recent example of this phenomenon is the controversy that ensued after Pennsylvania’s legalization of slot machines and the subsequent selection of two casino sites in Philadelphia. Our study analyses the Philadelphia casino controversy using a critical case study approach and the theoretical framework of accumulation by dispossession.We argue that the situation in Philadelphia represents attempted value extraction by corporate and government elites from communities and citizens. Moreover, the nature of the value extraction goes beyond the economic, impinging on the social dimensions of community life.

This article develops a critical theory of value creation in cross-sector partnerships by recasting value creation from the standpoint of the beneficiary. We first explain how distinct combinations of principles, relations and relational processes set largely non-overlapping foundations for conceptualizing the role of the beneficiary in value creation within Marxist, pragmatist and Frankfurt schools of thought. We introduce the construct of beneficiary voice to delineate and illustrate three distinct roles that beneficiaries may play in value creation in cross-sector partnerships: voice-receiving, voice-making and voice-taking. We then focus on the generative tensions to bridge value creation arguments across these three critical theories and thus contribute an overtly socialized and explicitly relational foundation of value creation in cross-sector partnerships.