Commentary: The unstoppable rise of the nanny company

And what about the problem of overreach? Though he was undoubtedly a great philanthropist, establishing a successful boarding school for low-income children and orphans, Milton Hershey went too far in employing private investigators to record signs of alcohol abuse or extramarital affairs among the residents of his eponymous town.

Today’s human resources bureaucracy increasingly demands fealty to progressive nostrums about diversity and sexual mores. Some wellness programmes encourage a “positive attitude” among employees in the name of mental wellness. You can have too much of a good thing.

Yet on the whole, the nanny company is to be applauded. It not only overcomes the major libertarian objection to the nanny state – that of compulsion – because employees are free to go elsewhere. One study found that 69 per cent of employees are more likely to choose one job over another if it offered better benefits and 75 per cent are more likely to stay in their job if they like the benefit package.

Corporate activism harnesses the power of companies to address social problems. Purists might argue that business should stick to business and leave democratically elected politicians to address social problems. But purist arguments seem out of touch when the state is so obviously overburdened and incompetent.

Corporate health programmes lighten the burden on the state while corporations can use their size and resources to break down governments’ resistance to building anything. Both Google and Facebook are planning to incorporate social housing in their new company towns.

Purists might also argue that it is no business of the corporation to address, say, obesity. But given the scale of the obesity problem, particularly in the US and the UK, and the strength of the forces tempting us to stuff our faces, surely society needs as many people as possible, whether they work for the government or the corporation, strengthening our wills.

In general, corporate nannies are doing the right thing, using their corporate muscles to address pressing problems and nudging their employees to behave more sensibly. They may give in to the temptation to go too far and force us to do unacceptable things like group dancing or collective exercise – but if they do, we can always resign and work for someone else.