We can provide an analysis of business itself as a case study in that it is structured, not in its namesake of being a profitable venture of trade, but for its habitat as a corporeal experience that retains differing objectives according to the cultural climate. In this manner, we view them in accordance with their alignment to current sociality that might be relevant to the moment and, more importantly, in how they respond in their niche method, but never as structured for a venture of profit..
We can view the evolution of business priorities over decades as being marked by significant shifts, notably according to conscious relevance of society and social experience, for they are merely managing that social experience more than anything else. Companies transitioned from relationship-driven systems to profit-oriented strategies. This is merely one point on a continuum, the profit-oriented method was simply a response to a society that regarded mechanization and statistics as a manner of interacting with each other, and profit labor as another method of that very system.
The Evolution of Business Priorities by Decade
1950s–1960s: Consumer Boom and Brand Loyalty
This was an important factor of sociality, companies were not responding to the demand of the market but being inherent to that sociality, seeking those long-term relationships for no other reason than as a response to that social need.
1970s–1980s: Cost-Cutting and Globalization
Globalization was not produced by companies’ choice in cost-cutting, for that would have been a need in the 50s or in any decade, but rather, was the moving sociality, one of globalization. The cost-centric focus was not a production of the foundational element of business, but a manner where it took center stage because itemization was the sociality of that era, so that one perceived their company viewing it as a statistical analysis of itemized portions; one was doing the same in the family body or in relationships. Profit is a great form of itemization, as it can be viewed in isolation from its dynamic interactions.
1990s–2000s: Digital Transformation
This was in response to an imagination that allowed freedom in social experience, where technology fits like a glove, and when that imagination begins to cede, so does technology. However, the point of the matter is that the focus was on another social element, beyond itemization, to a psychological perspective of design and creativity beyond the foundational elements of infrastructure. In this era, it allowed the companies’ geographical position to change, for they did not need to be tethered to growing cities, and in fact, it hampered their growth, so that a simple valley in a desert emerges.
2010s: Growth
This is a response to building systems for their inherent sake, which some interpret as power itself. Power manifests when one builds a system only for the sake of the system itself. Society was preoccupied with power and system-building, to which the companies responded in kind. One point of recognition is that these systems were still relegated to the realm of imagination, so that they were conceptually oriented despite the focus on growth and system building. Even companies tethered to infrastructure took a great focus on the technological aspect of their business, despite it not having a greater impact on profit, at least not in the long term. Technology was integrated because that was the only manner of perceiving a company in that era. Many technological solutions were simply added to the weight of the company, which can only be understood, if not for profit, for participating in the era’s conceptual systems. If the 2000s were for the office setting, the 2010s were the complexity of the company’s computer systems.
Computation systems were a way to participate in the fluctuating sociality that took focus away from current sociality. We often forget that technology is not a social objective, but rather in how technology is a conceptual representation. Specific focus on technology is a data point in conceptual building. This makes corporations complicated because the corporate entity is already a conceptual construction; adding the objective of serving societal interaction creates a double layer of abstraction, generating confusion throughout its systems.
Business Priorities and the Role of Profit
Throughout the analysis, the role of profit in business has notably been transitional. While profit has consistently remained a component, much like currency is a component of an economy but arbitrary in itself, industrial efficiency plays a role as well. This efficiency reflects the reciprocal nature of returning kindness that accompanies consumer relations. Expansion allows organizations to act more fully as an “organization,” systematizing themselves to provide the very act of being a conglomerate of beings that serve and interact with society. In modern business, growth itself has become a central, independent goal, often surpassing immediate profitability and, arguably, any futuristic profitability.
The Corporeal Construct