factors linked to different expectations. Expectations related
to the benefits obtainable are distinguished in terms of
quantity, quality, distribution, and timing.
The expectations of all the players are different and
uncertain, but they constitute a strong element of cohesion
and push towards improvement. However, this is not enough
to avoid the opportunistic behavior of groups and/or individuals, particularly when we are going through critical
moments that test the going concern. Production players may
be exposed to risk with different intensity. The need to use
other instruments of internal cohesion that reinforces the
conditions for the good functioning of the company is evident. This finding brings us back to governance problems
and introduces us to the next topic that concerns the concrete
functioning of the company over time.
The assessment of the going concern of a company
focuses on the wideness of the activity program. This program constitutes the link between the possible solutions of
the social contract (governance), and the efficiency of the
productions realized. The problem of going concern concerns structural choices (distribution of sacrifices and benefits, as well as the wideness of the entrepreneurial program is
based on efficiency expectations) linked to each other and
the efficient performance of operations. The foundation of
the durability of production over time is linked to efficiency.
The uncertainty regards the occurrence that the overall
scenario (with respect to which the programmed results are
calculated) is expressed in a different way from what is
expected. There are, therefore, results that are different from
those desired which compromise the (economic) order of the
manufacturer, endangering its survival.
Two cases must be distinguished:
– the deviation due to an optimistic assessment of the
future, formulated in good faith, or due to opportunism;
– the deviation due to the action that determines the
outcome.
In this last case, it is necessary to be able to recognize the
malfunctions—even deliberate—of unexpected events that,
of course, can compromise the going concern of the
company.
The malfunction occurs when the production combinations are made differently from the production program. This
happens because of organizational choices concerning the
efficient performance of the productions.
An unwanted scenario could be neutralized in all (or
largely) by acting on organizational processes. This involves
the sustaining of costs. Alternatively, the company would
expose itself to a possible future negative event. In one case,
organizational choices face uncertainty, while in the other,
exposure to uncertainty is a “friction” to which it is
consciously subjected to choices of convenience or lack of
alternatives. Uncertainty can be faced by focusing on the
basic structure of the company, that is, on the wideness and
on the social contract. Alternatively, if the basic scenario is
not changed, economic–financial strengthening policies can
be implemented. The two choices are not alternatives.
5.2 Going Concern, Risk, and Social
Responsibility: The Spread of Information
The hinges of the going concern (governance, wideness, and
efficient functioning of the production process) were presented sequentially. In substance, they represent the entire
corporate challenge, inseparably linked to the humanistic
and environmental profiles that characterize the production.
In other words, the company operates (systematically) in the
environment through choices of economic functionality that
are significant from the point of view of the humanistic–
environmental profile (and, therefore, of risk distribution)
that defines the specific identity.
The (rational) choice of ethical values in the reference
environment implies a particularly complex evaluation. This
choice must reconcile the institutional purpose, the
production/distribution processes and the conditions of
economic functionality. These elements are closely related to
the issue of going concern and the distribution of risks and,
therefore, with the problems of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in general.
Two questions can be formulated. What meaning can be
assigned to the CSR expression from the point of view of
economic–business analysis? How is social responsibility
linked to the issues of uncertainty and risk? The following
reasoning tries to answer these questions.
All production players have an impact on the community.
However, the institutional goals for which production is
implemented are different. Consequently, their economic
morphology is different, as it is affected by the realization of
the institutional objectives, in line with the gratification of
the multiple expectations of those who participate in various
ways in the production.
The assessment of the social responsibility of a company
can be rationally set by systematically analyzing the going
concern, the production process, the efficiency, the adequacy
of the performance, the institutional effectiveness, and the
social impact. The going concern is an essential condition
for expressing a judgment of social responsibility on the
behavior of a production players (Manni 2011b; Salman and
Abdul Razzaq 2018; Azzam Hannon, & Hayek, A. F 2016).
Social responsibility represents the foresight of governance. The assessment of social responsibility does not end
with considering single—even if praiseworthy—patronizing
The Business Going Concern: Financial Return …
209
to the benefits obtainable are distinguished in terms of
quantity, quality, distribution, and timing.
The expectations of all the players are different and
uncertain, but they constitute a strong element of cohesion
and push towards improvement. However, this is not enough
to avoid the opportunistic behavior of groups and/or individuals, particularly when we are going through critical
moments that test the going concern. Production players may
be exposed to risk with different intensity. The need to use
other instruments of internal cohesion that reinforces the
conditions for the good functioning of the company is evident. This finding brings us back to governance problems
and introduces us to the next topic that concerns the concrete
functioning of the company over time.
The assessment of the going concern of a company
focuses on the wideness of the activity program. This program constitutes the link between the possible solutions of
the social contract (governance), and the efficiency of the
productions realized. The problem of going concern concerns structural choices (distribution of sacrifices and benefits, as well as the wideness of the entrepreneurial program is
based on efficiency expectations) linked to each other and
the efficient performance of operations. The foundation of
the durability of production over time is linked to efficiency.
The uncertainty regards the occurrence that the overall
scenario (with respect to which the programmed results are
calculated) is expressed in a different way from what is
expected. There are, therefore, results that are different from
those desired which compromise the (economic) order of the
manufacturer, endangering its survival.
Two cases must be distinguished:
– the deviation due to an optimistic assessment of the
future, formulated in good faith, or due to opportunism;
– the deviation due to the action that determines the
outcome.
In this last case, it is necessary to be able to recognize the
malfunctions—even deliberate—of unexpected events that,
of course, can compromise the going concern of the
company.
The malfunction occurs when the production combinations are made differently from the production program. This
happens because of organizational choices concerning the
efficient performance of the productions.
An unwanted scenario could be neutralized in all (or
largely) by acting on organizational processes. This involves
the sustaining of costs. Alternatively, the company would
expose itself to a possible future negative event. In one case,
organizational choices face uncertainty, while in the other,
exposure to uncertainty is a “friction” to which it is
consciously subjected to choices of convenience or lack of
alternatives. Uncertainty can be faced by focusing on the
basic structure of the company, that is, on the wideness and
on the social contract. Alternatively, if the basic scenario is
not changed, economic–financial strengthening policies can
be implemented. The two choices are not alternatives.
5.2 Going Concern, Risk, and Social
Responsibility: The Spread of Information
The hinges of the going concern (governance, wideness, and
efficient functioning of the production process) were presented sequentially. In substance, they represent the entire
corporate challenge, inseparably linked to the humanistic
and environmental profiles that characterize the production.
In other words, the company operates (systematically) in the
environment through choices of economic functionality that
are significant from the point of view of the humanistic–
environmental profile (and, therefore, of risk distribution)
that defines the specific identity.
The (rational) choice of ethical values in the reference
environment implies a particularly complex evaluation. This
choice must reconcile the institutional purpose, the
production/distribution processes and the conditions of
economic functionality. These elements are closely related to
the issue of going concern and the distribution of risks and,
therefore, with the problems of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in general.
Two questions can be formulated. What meaning can be
assigned to the CSR expression from the point of view of
economic–business analysis? How is social responsibility
linked to the issues of uncertainty and risk? The following
reasoning tries to answer these questions.
All production players have an impact on the community.
However, the institutional goals for which production is
implemented are different. Consequently, their economic
morphology is different, as it is affected by the realization of
the institutional objectives, in line with the gratification of
the multiple expectations of those who participate in various
ways in the production.
The assessment of the social responsibility of a company
can be rationally set by systematically analyzing the going
concern, the production process, the efficiency, the adequacy
of the performance, the institutional effectiveness, and the
social impact. The going concern is an essential condition
for expressing a judgment of social responsibility on the
behavior of a production players (Manni 2011b; Salman and
Abdul Razzaq 2018; Azzam Hannon, & Hayek, A. F 2016).
Social responsibility represents the foresight of governance. The assessment of social responsibility does not end
with considering single—even if praiseworthy—patronizing
The Business Going Concern: Financial Return …
209