How Individual Investors Are Shaping Corporate America
Balanced Investment Co. founder Suresh Basnet specializes in values-centered investing and is a certified meditation coach.
We often hear that "voting with your wallet" is one of the most powerful ways to effect change. As a financial advisor who has spent decades helping families and institutions match their investments with their values, I've watched local investors grapple with a fundamental question: Can individual investment choices really make a difference?
The answer is yes—but perhaps not in the way you'd expect.
Despite recent political debates over environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, America's retirement accounts wield more influence over corporate America than most people realize. Recent shareholder votes at major corporations prove this point dramatically.
The Growing Influence Of ESG Investing
Despite political debates over ESG investing, the numbers tell an undeniable story. Global sustainable fund assets reached a record $3.2 trillion at the end of 2024, more than quadruple the size in 2018, according to Morningstar.
More importantly, companies with strong ESG performance have demonstrated remarkable resilience during market volatility. According to McKinsey research, 'companies that achieve better growth and profitability than their peers while improving sustainability and ESG outgrow their peers and exceed them in shareholder returns.'
Research has found that companies with better ESG ratings enjoy both a lower cost of equity and a lower cost of debt. This translates to more efficient operations and influences how investors view companies.
Corporate Response To Investor Pressure
Recent events demonstrate that corporations are highly attuned to shareholder priorities, even amid polarized political narratives. While some companies publicly distance themselves from ESG terminology, their actions tell a different story when faced with shareholder interests.
Major companies are strategically reframing rather than abandoning sustainability initiatives. A comprehensive May survey by The Conference Board found that 52% of executives are reworking their sustainability messaging, including moving away from the term "ESG," while 80% of companies are adjusting their ESG strategies in response to political pressures—but in most cases are continuing the underlying work.
This aligns with the pushback from shareholders against attempts to abandon social responsibility frameworks. Over 97% of Apple shareholders voted against a proposal asking the company to "cease DEI efforts" at its February meeting. More than 98% of Costco shares voted against a similar proposal in January.
Meanwhile, financial powerhouses continue defending these practices as essential to business success. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said the bank will continue its outreach to Black, Hispanic, LGBT, veteran and disabled communities, as reported by Reuters.
As an early advocate of ESG investing, I've watched this movement evolve from niche to mainstream from the West Coast to America's Heartland. The message is increasingly clear: Companies face greater risk from ignoring ESG factors than from embracing them.
The Balanced Approach To Value-Aligned Investing
I've spent my career dispelling the myth that investing according to personal values requires sacrificing returns. My approach helps clients evaluate decisions across multiple dimensions: spiritual, health, family, finances and career.
This holistic view reveals that successful investing isn't solely about financial returns. It's also about ensuring your money works in alignment with your deeper values and priorities. One critical insight from guiding hundreds of clients through retirement planning: Investments that contradict personal values create cognitive dissonance that diminishes life satisfaction, regardless of returns.
For the average professional with a 401(k) or investment portfolio, implementing this approach isn't complicated:
• Review your current investments for alignment with your values.
• Engage with your workplace retirement plan administrator about ESG options.
• Consider direct stock ownership for greater shareholder voting power.
• Participate in shareholder meetings and proxy votes.
• Consolidate smaller accounts for greater investment flexibility.
The Future Of Financial Influence
As more investors recognize their power, corporate behavior is increasingly reflecting shareholder values rather than just quarterly profit motives. The rise of shareholder activism has created unprecedented democratization of corporate governance.
The implications extend beyond individual companies to entire industries and public policy. When corporations see their market valuation and cost of capital directly tied to environmental and social performance, they become powerful advocates for policy solutions that enable sustainable business practices.
The finance industry, once focused exclusively on short-term returns, increasingly recognizes that long-term prosperity requires addressing climate risks, social inequities and governance failures.
Your retirement account or investment portfolio may seem like just another financial instrument, but in reality, it's one of your most powerful tools for creating the world you wish to see. As I often tell my meditation and financial coaching clients, true wealth comes when your money, relationships and values exist in harmony.
The next time you check your 401(k) statement or investment account, remember: You're not just saving for retirement—you're shaping our collective future.
The information provided here is not investment, tax or financial advice. You should consult with a licensed professional for advice concerning your specific situation.
Forbes Finance Council is an invitation-only organization for executives in successful accounting, financial planning and wealth management firms. Do I qualify?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
31 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Wimbledon 2025: Coco Gauff is just 21 but already thinking about what to do after tennis
LONDON (AP) — To be clear, Coco Gauff didn't bring up the word 'star' during a recent interview with The Associated Press; the reporter did. So as Gauff began to answer a question about balancing her life as a professional athlete with her off-court interests, she caught herself repeating that term. 'I definitely didn't know how it would look like,' she began with a smile, 'before I got to be, I guess, a star — feels weird to call myself that — but I definitely did want to expand outside of tennis. Always. Since I was young.' She still is young, by just about any measure, and she is a really good tennis player — Gauff owns the Grand Slam titles and No. 2 ranking to prove it as she heads into Wimbledon, which begins Monday — but the 21-year-old American is also more than that. Someone unafraid to express her opinions about societal issues. Someone who connects with fans via social media. Someone who is the highest-paid female athlete in any sport, topping $30 million last year, according to with less than a third of that from prize money and most via deals with companies such as UPS, New Balance, Rolex and Barilla. Someone who recently launched her own management firm. And someone who wants to succeed in the business world long after she no longer swings a racket on tour. 'It's definitely something that I want to start to step up for post-career. Kind of start building that process, which is why I wanted to do it early. Because I didn't want to feel like I was playing catch-up at the end of my career,' said Gauff, who will face Dayana Yastremska in the first round at the All England Club on Tuesday. 'On the business side of things, it doesn't come as natural as tennis feels. I'm still learning, and I have a lot to learn about,' Gauff said. 'I've debated different things and what paths I wanted to take when it came to just stimulating my brain outside of the court, because I always knew that once I finished high school that I needed to put my brain into something else.' In a campaign announced this week by UPS, which first partnered with Gauff in 2023 before she won that year's U.S. Open, she connects with business coach Emma Grede — known for working with Kim Kardashian on Skims, and with Khloe Kardashian on Good American — to offer mentoring to three small-business owners. 'Coco plays a key role in helping us connect with those younger Gen-Z business owners — emerging or younger entrepreneurs,' Betsy Wilson, VP of digital marketing and brand activation at UPS, said in a phone interview. 'Obviously, she's very relevant in social media and in culture, and working with Coco helps us really connect with that younger group.' While Grede helped the entrepreneurs, Gauff also got the opportunity to pick up tips. 'It's really cool to learn from someone like her,' Gauff said. 'Whenever I feel like I'm ready to make that leap, I can definitely reach out to her for advice and things like that. ... This will help me right now and definitely in the long term.' ___ Howard Fendrich has been the AP's tennis writer since 2002. Find his stories here: More AP tennis:
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
St. Joseph County home listings asked for more money in May - see the current median price here
The median home in St. Joseph County listed for $265,900 in May, up 9% from the previous month's $243,950, an analysis of data from shows. Compared to May 2024, the median home list price decreased 2.9% from $289,000. The statistics in this article only pertain to houses listed for sale in St. Joseph County, not houses that were sold. Information on your local housing market, along with other useful community data, is available at St. Joseph County's median home was 1,777 square feet, listed at $148 per square foot. The price per square foot of homes for sale is mostly unchanged from May 2024. Listings in St. Joseph County moved steadily, at a median 43 days listed compared to the May national median of 51 days on the market. In the previous month, homes had a median of 43 days on the market. Around 76 homes were newly listed on the market in May, an 8.6% increase from 70 new listings in May 2024. The median home prices issued by may exclude many, or even most, of a market's homes. The price and volume represent only single-family homes, condominiums or townhomes. They include existing homes, but exclude most new construction as well as pending and contingent sales. In Michigan, median home prices were $299,900, a slight increase from April. The median Michigan home listed for sale had 1,618 square feet, with a price of $184 per square foot. Throughout the United States, the median home price was $440,000, a slight increase from the month prior. The median American home for sale was listed at 1,840 square feet, with a price of $234 per square foot. The median home list price used in this report represents the midway point of all the houses or units listed over the given period of time. Experts say the median offers a more accurate view of what's happening in a market than the average list price, which would mean taking the sum of all listing prices then dividing by the number of homes sold. The average can be skewed by one particularly low or high price. The USA TODAY Network is publishing localized versions of this story on its news sites across the country, generated with data from Please leave any feedback or corrections for this story here. This story was written by Ozge Terzioglu. Our News Automation and AI team would like to hear from you. Take this survey and share your thoughts with us. This article originally appeared on Sturgis Journal: St. Joseph County home listings asked for more money in May - see the current median price here
Forbes
39 minutes ago
- Forbes
Will The ‘Beautiful' Bill Increase The Deficit?
NEW YORK - FEBRUARY 19: The National Debt Clock is seen February 19, 2004 in New York City. ... More According to a Treasury Department report, the U.S. governments national debt, the accumulation of past budget shortfalls, reached a total of more than $7 trillion for the first time. (Photo by) The performative exchange of military strikes between Iran and the US means that a nuclear tipped hot war in the Middle East is off the cards for the moment, though the bad news is that a far greater crisis awaits. In the past five or so weeks prominent financiers – Ray Dalio, Jamie Dimon and even Elon Musk – have warned about the burgeoning fiscal deficit and the mountain of debt that the US (and other countries) has accumulated. A very decent blog post by Indermit Gill, the chief economist at the World Bank, outlines the viewpoint. Next week, there is a good chance that the Senate passes President Trump's budget, which according to the independent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) will swell the deficit by close to USD 3trn and push debt to GDP towards an unprecedented 125% in the next ten years Additionally, rumours that the next Federal Reserve chair will be picked soon by President Trump (Powell leaves in May 2026) has upset the dollar, making life even more difficult for foreign holders of US debt. What is interesting is not how gargantuan the world's debt load has become, but how few people care. Politics in the West has changed so much that it has neutered what used to be a political class who in a very Catholic way, pronounced themselves to be fiscally responsible. In the US, it used to be the case that a good number of Senators were what was called 'fiscal hawks', or had an aversion to large budget deficits, and an even greater aversion to resolving them through higher taxes (the US has only produced budget surplus twice – under Lyndon Johnson and then Bill Clinton – and in both cases taxes were raised). Paul Krugman has referred to deficit hawks as 'deficit scolds', because the spend more time warning about the dangers of the deficit than fixing it. Ronald Reagan, and the policy makers who surrounded him – namely James Baker, Nicholas Brady and Don Reagan, were fiscally conservative by reputation but had the luxury of being able to grow the US economy through tax cuts and de-regulation. At the time (early 1980's onwards) some Republicans had a 'starve the beast' mindset, which is to say that they favoured lowering taxes so that the government would have less revenue to spend, but there is little evidence that this worked as a strategy (partly because many of the initial Reagan tax cuts were aimed at the rich). In the post Reagan phase, deficit reduction as a virtue came into its own in the Robert Rubin era (at the Treasury), and many of his former colleagues and acolytes continued this during the early years of the Obama presidency (a relevant private body is the Hamilton Project, where Rubin was a founder). One of the notable initiatives of the Obama White House was the creation of the US National Committee on National Fiscal Responsibility and Reform or the Simpson-Bowles Commission as it became known, a bi-partisan body that aimed to reduce the fiscal deficit and debt. Its most noteworthy aspect, in my memory, was the degree of civility and collaboration between representatives of the Democrats and Republicans. Such a body could not exist today. Indeed, the radicalisation of parts of both parties, in the context of quantitative easing (which has dulled the impact of rising debt and deficits) has broken the link between fiscal responsibility and electability. For example, the first crack in the Republican edifice was the advent of the Tea Party Movement, one of whose tenets was tough fiscal responsibility, as inspired by a 'Chicago Tea Party' rant from CNBC commentator Rick Santelli in 2009. Many of the Tea Party oriented voters and Republican politicians then gravitated to the Trump corner in 2016, the price of which was a surrender of their fiscal sacred cows. Today there is only a handful of fiscally conservative Republican Senators (the Club for Growth publishes an annual scorecard of how fiscally rigorous it thinks members of the House and Senate are). The majority of Republican Senators appear happy to give the nod to a policy that edges the US closer to the financial precipice. Indeed, not only will the Trump budget favour wealthy households but it will increase the number of financially precarious households, and damage healthcare and education provision. The other interesting observation I draw is that the relationship between debt and politics has now reached a turning point, and from here debt will condition politics. I see this happening in at least three ways. The first is that in the context of 'zero fiscal space' the constraints imposed by high levels of debt and deficits, will drive new splits within parties, for example between those who are keen to spend more on defence, versus those who wish to preserve social welfare safety nets. The revolt by a large number of Labour MPs against benefit cuts imposed by Keir Starmer is an example. In the future, this cleavage may inspire new political parties. To echo a recent note (The Power Algorithm) new 'tech bro' parties could materialise that prefer using robots to do the work of immigrants and that technology should be deployed for social control. The second, related scenario is that in the absence of money to spend, the traditional 'pork barrel' cycle of politics disintegrates, and instead politicians tilt the broad political debate to non-fiscal issues – identity, foreign policy, and immigration. A third element in the hypothesis is that voters observe mainstream politicians to be helpless and useless in the face of very high fiscal constraints, and they become largely apathetic about politics and in some cases vote for extreme candidates, such as 'chainsaw economists' as in the case of Argentina. In this way, and perhaps exceptionally in history, the coming debt crisis (if the World Bank's economist is correct) will be intertwined with the current crisis of politics.
