1. making a profit to their owners, obeying laws

1. Drawing upon the related Chapter 5 PowerPoint presentation (the second of the two of provided for Chapter 5, and the one specifically covering Corporate Social Responsibility, or CSR) and the related video, What is Corporate Social Responsibility? (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRtYyfcTnWs), how would you describe Corporate Social Responsibility? How is it related to the Triple Bottom Line? Sustainability? What are some of the arguments both for and against Corporate Social Responsibility? What are the benefits to companies of Corporate Social Responsibility? A corporation is mainly responsible for making profits for it owner or shareholders. They also should help and supports the community they live in and protect the environment. Corporate responsibility should also include caring for employees and people in need of help. Companies need to at a minimum support making a profit to their owners, obeying laws and be social responsibility. There are two types of approaches to social responsibility. Companies can be what is called sustainable. They help society as one of their main goals like selling products such as making rugs from developing companies made of natural materials. Other are like Ben & Jerrys who are famous for their ice cream and for supporting charities. Developing products that will improve society bio degradable products. Companies that follow a stakeholder theory focuses on every stake holder a business touched such as: employees having secure job and excellent wages; company having happy workers and profits; customer being provided good service and products, owner having good financial return; suppliers having a good profitable relationship with company:  companies paying their taxes and offer citizens good wages to a community: and help support the environment.  Triple bottom line is defining as how you deal with people, the planet, and how you make a profit and how they all come together in a good way How social environmental impact health and wellbeing: eco-economics being energy and resource efficient while helping the environment, and social economics are good for business by training staff providing good employment while supporting the local community. Argument against. A business reason for existing is to make money. Only nonprofits should be the only ones concerned by society and doing good will.  These good deeds mean you have to spend much more which costs a lot of money. Importing products from poor countries and using sustainable materials drives up cost making them less competitive and possible making a company lose money or go out of business.  Arguments for. It is just the right thing to do. Companies should care about the environment, society and the people around them. Companies have caused damage to the environment and caused unemployment and therefore have a responsibility to fix them. If companies don’t then the government will then force them to make changes through new laws and regulations which could be even more costly to them.  There have been many companies that have adopted this philosophy and have benefited from this such as Ben & Jerrys , Starbucks using Ethos water and Patagonia setting aside hiking and camping parks for people to use are examples.  There is greater Interested in long term interests of our communities. Sustainability develop a product or service that a need that benefits a society and stake holder theory is about taking care of all the stake holders. These things can and do have a positive impact on the bottom line. Consumer respond positively and buy more from these companies and feel more connected to them. They tend to be more innovative and attract better workers. Investors care about these issues and therefore the businesses have to be more responsive around these important issues. 2. With respect to the material for Chapter 6 (the textbook and related PowerPoint presentation), describe/articulate the critical points, from both sides, in the current “debate” over advertising and its role in business/society?  Which side do you take and why? Does advertising educate (a.k.a., inform) or manipulate (a.k.a., persuade) consumers? What are some of the ethical concerns/considerations when it comes to advertising to children? Note: The video Unethical Advertising to Children (One Student’s project) (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwVU8FqIKZI) may be helpful in responding to this last part of question #3.  The debate over advertising has led to an interesting argument on whether or not the issue is ethical or not. Those who defend advertisement say that it has three main advantages. The first they say is that it is all part of a free- market and companies have the right. Second, that this is a protected form of speech. Lastly, is an excellent sponsor for social media. Those who are against advertisement would say that it is a form of manipulation and creates needs that weren’t there to begin with. The process of demand all begins with the advertisement as these products would not be wanted without this advertisement. It creates awareness, interest and desire to buy a product.  They are creating a brand that is social in nature so that people identify with the product and then want to be part of it to be accepted and feel good about themselves. They would also say that this leads us to lean towards private consumption rather than public goods and services. I believe that businesses have social responsibility to a certain extent. Businesses definitely do have the right and freedom of speech to do so. It is also important to be mindful that these are businesses and they run mostly off of advertisement so that they can make a profit. However, the government should definitely have responsibility over mislabeled goods and especially goods that can harm us or impact our health in anyway. I do see how advertising manipulates consumers especially through media as I am on social media every day. Companies can be very persuasive and influence a person to purchase an item solely based off a commercial or ad. These new generations try so hard to keep up with the latest trends and looks that they feed into these ads and end up purchasing the products. This is the same for children which I believe is pretty unethical. This can range from advertisements of toys to even food. Food commercials have become very popular over the years and have even been a leading factor of child obesity.   A child’s brain and social capabilities are still developing, therefore they are much more susceptible to be manipulated by advertisements.  They are also developing a sense of self-worth and self-awareness. Through these 1,000s of daily commercials they are being taught they need these products to feel good about themselves, to be accepted by others and to be part of and belong to group which are natural human interests.  Because of this it is unethical to manipulate children through advertising. It would be the same as advertising drugs to and addict. That is just plain and simply wrong.  Advertisements should be targeted to adults that are socially, legally, and morally responsible to take care off, develop and protect children. Adults have the knowledge, intellect and maturity to better understand and less likely to be adversely effected by commercials.    3. Drawing upon the material for Chapter 7 (the textbook and related PowerPoint presentation), describe business’s Traditional view of/on the environment. How would you describe the notion of the “Tragedy of the Commons” and how does it compare/contrast to Adam Smith’s notion of “The Invisible Hand” we discussed in Chapter 4? Insofar as the social justice question of “Who should pay the cost of Environmental Protection”, would you advocate that those responsible for causing environmental harm should pay, or that all those who stand to benefit from such protection/restoration should pay? Why? Drawing upon the material from Chapter 7, businesses are partly responsible for the damage we see today in our environment along with the behavior of excessive consumer consumption. At the individual business level, one does not necessarily see the negative impact to the environment.  However, thousands of businesses behaving with self-interest has a very large impact on the environment. Businesses continue to take from the environment and resources as if they are unlimited. At the end of the day, all these businesses are producing products for the consumers who demand them which causes extensive pollution in the process. “The tragedy of Commons” has the same core driving force as Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” since business owners like individuals can be selfish and only have their own best interest at heart.  Many factors motivate them, the main one being money. With “tragedy of Commons”, self-interest and motivation has a negative effect on the environment but this same self-interest has a positive effect with the “invisible had” as this creates greater innovation, risk taking and improved productivity.This downside to self-interest with “tragedy of the Commons” does indeed help the owners and those involved with the business make more money but ends up hurting the society as a whole as a result of the greed that comes from them. This is completely the opposite to “the invisible hand” which is basically a natural force that guides free market through competition for limited resources.   Not only should the businesses pay for this environmental damage but the consumers as well who demand these products and purchase them.  A consumption tax as products are produced or added to in the manufacturing process could be used to fix environment damage caused manufactured goods and also reduce the demand of consumer goods by raising their cost with the added tax. The thought is you pay more as you buy and use more products that come from the environment to produce these items. Some of the tax should be used create environmental safe zones such as expansion of national parks to preserve the environment for future generations and save the planet. These environmental issues will only get worse with the continued population growth, rising affluence, and urbanization which lead to pollution as well. I believe that everyone no matter what social standing would benefit from environmental protection.   4. Focusing on the material for Chapter 9 (the textbook and related PowerPoint presentation), for what reasons is privacy important to the employee stakeholder group? Compare and contrast legitimate influence and illegitimate influence when it comes to how employee behavior outside the workplace (i.e., “off duty”) may or may not be considered by employers? What present-day factor/technology complicates this discussion/determination and why? What are the three prevailing definitions of “Quality of Work Life” and to which would you subscribe? Privacy is extremely important to the employee stakeholder group as privacy is nonetheless a fundamental right. Most people do not want their private information to be publicly known and want to be able to control their personal information. This is especially true around health and family issues that are personal in nature and has no impact on a job performance or a companies’ reputation.  As humans, we also value being able to make our own personal decisions especially outside of the workplace. Businesses are always concerned about issues that directly correlate and impact your performance in the workplace as they want to protect and enhance the company’s reputation and do not want anyone to reflect poorly on the company. A company that attempts to influence the behavior of employees outside the workplace can be interpreted as invasion of privacy.Controlling outside activities is illegitimate when it has no connection to how good a person does their job or has no impact on the reputation of the companyIn class, we were given an example of someone cursing at his son’s softball game and how this could potentially reflect poorly on his company. However, most of my classmates agreed that this would not be something significant enough to become an issue or reflect too poorly on the company as there are bigger issues. However, this also really depends on the position you hold within the company and where you stand. A legitimate influence would certainly be if it impacts your performance in a negative way. Companies can have reason to try to control the behavior of employees when the behavior violates the companies’ policies and principles. An employee that is reckless or does illegal behavior could be legitimate because it shows a significant lack of judgement outside of work.There are many ways an employer can assess an employee’s behavior such as tracking their post on social media where they may use bad language, be pictured drinking or taking drugs and other negative activities. These are all recent tools that employers use when hiring a prospective employee. This information also could be share with the company from fellow employees. Depending on the issue it could be a legitimate reason to terminate and employee or send them to counsel.Employers also use drug testing when hiring new employees and during employment to randomly to check for drug use. Some employees also conduct lie detector test if someone is suspected of a serious work-related issue. For some businesses, the quality of life means providing work opportunities to develop and refine skills. In another business it could mean, providing for greater participation in the outcome of their work and indulging into deeper senses of achievement. For other businesses, the quality of life means providing workers with less supervision and more freedom.  I agree with providing for greater participation in the execution of work for greater deeper achievement.  I like to be actively involved in planning, working on and completing a project. 

x

Hi!
I'm Clifton!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out