Business is a privileged interest in capitalist societies. Its power dwarfs that of any other interest and it has greater influence on the policy process and policy outcomes than any other single distinguishable group. Yet, business does not always get its own way, and governments do not always act in its interests. Too often accounts of business power fail to adequately take account of this. What is required is a theory of business influence which clearly maps out corporate power and influence without straying into determinism – that is, the argument that government and state actions are determined by capitalist structures and the capitalist class. The argument put forward here is that business power and influence are variable over time and between policy areas. Before being able to develop this argument further, however, it is necessary to rehearse the key theoretical accounts of corporate power. To do this, a distinction is made between agency (influence through action) and structure (influence without action). Both forms of power are, in practice, interrelated, but making the conceptual distinction between them helps us to grasp better the ways in which business is able to exert influence. Following a discussion and critique of the two, they are brought together to frame the key theoretical arguments of the book.

Influence through action

Both Marxists and elite theorists have argued that the direct participation of business in the institutions of the state is important to the realisation of corporate power. Miliband (1969) provides the most familiar Marxist account. According to him, it is the ability of business to dominate the institutions of the state that is the key to business power and influence, although he also acknowledged that business people usually constitute no more than a small minority of state personnel (Miliband, 1969, p 55). More important to Miliband is the fact that key positions within the state are occupied by the natural allies of business – the middle and upper classes from which the leaders of business, the media and the state are drawn (Miliband, 1969, pp 23, 61).

Elite theorists put forward a similar argument. Domhoff (1967, 1978, 1987), for example, has provided a great deal of evidence to demonstrate that business and other elite interests have dominated the state in the US.