For as long as we have lived some business has been known to destroy the earth’s natural environment for their own selfish reasons, without showing any concern of who or what might be affected from their decisions. Environmental conscience means to have a sense of what is right and wrong with in the environment. In the article “Business and Environmental Ethics” by W. Michael Hoffman debates that business has a moral obligation to develop an environmental conscience and to participate in solving environmental problems. In the film ‘The Corporation” it argues that it is not even possible for a corporation to develop an environmental conscience at all. In this essay I will explain how W. Michael Hoffman argue his position and why the film “The …show more content…
Well corporations use this amendment to define themselves as a person and not a group of people. This classified corporations to be a person without no moral conscience, these people are known to be psychopath. A corporation sole purpose is to make profit for the stakeholders. These people who work for these corporation is motivated but only greed and this includes destroying the environment, going against human law, slaving animals and many other unmoral activities. These corporations view these decisions as cost effective moves and nothing else. If the cost of getting caught and paying the fine is less than actually following the law, they have made the right decision that would make the most …show more content…
Michael Hoffman takes on that business has a moral obligation to develop an environmental conscience and to participate in solving environmental problems is what I based my moral principles on. Business have too develop a moral conscience because without it they are going to continue to destroy the earth and every living being on it including us the human being. The majority of the world have shouldn’t have to continue to suffer from the few people that control the world due to their greed for money. Business need to participate in solving environmental problems because created the problem that we have today, which came from the business who had no moral conscience. Everyone deserve to experience life and be able to live till an old age, us and the future
The moral dilemma identified in the Lake Pleasant Bodies case is an attorney’s disturbing conflict with his competing rights to his client and as Badaracco (2009) states “…and his empathy for the victims’ families” (Badaracco, 2009, p. 6). In the case study, Attorney Frank Armani sympathizes with the father of a victim and questions divulging confidential information that would breech the attorney-client agreement with his client Frank Garrow. Additionally, the moral dilemma includes the overwhelming decisions Armani faced constructing a plausible defense for this client and at the same time setting aside his personal reservations regarding his clients guilt.
Milton Friedman, who was a prominent economist, wrote a thought-provoking article in the New York Times Magazine in 1970 on the subject: social responsibility and ethics in strategic management. The one end of the economic policy spectrum, Adam Smith, influences Freidman. Smith embraces the knowledge that consumer and producer control the stability of the economy. This is based on free market equilibrium. Freidman most renowned quote is “There is one and only one social responsibility of business-to increase its profits.” The above quote clearly state his opinion on the concept of social responsibility. Freidman argues against the concept of social responsibility and his reasoning’s of corporations having one responsibility that is to make money, which has made him quite legendary.
Currently, businesses are facing a growing societal pressure to perform responsibly and sustainably. Western cultures have become more aware of the effect their consumption has on the environment. Furthermore companies are being put under pressure to treat labour, and where applicable, animals with greater care. However this is to an extent optional and it is often argued that corporate social responsibility is taken up voluntarily by the business and that following laws regarding ethical trading is just a prerequisite to “fulfilling the responsibility of enterprises” (Enderle, 2014, pp 723 - 735). Some businesses have monopolised on the added value of ethically sourced products, through promoting a positive brand
Cases have been widely used in medical ethics and law. In both fields, numerous books and articles about cases have appeared, including book-length catalogs of cases. I argue that pluralistic casuistry provides an adequate approach to environmental ethics. It retains the strengths while avoiding the weaknesses of the other approaches. Importantly, it resolves some broader theoretical issues and provides a clear, explicit methodology for education and praxis.
For my paper I chose the case of Avco Environmental. The case is fictitious and can be found on the businessethics.ca linked provided in prezi. The facts of the case are Chantale Leroux, a clerk for Avco Environmental Services, which is a toxic waste disposal company, has found evidence that Avco might be disposing medical waste in the local municipal landfill. I feel this case violates seven of the ten primary traps and eight of the ten prima facie duties. In reading the case, you can separate Chantale the person from Avco Environmental the company and see who has violated what traps.
“There is only one and only one social responsibility of business- to use its resources and engage in activities designated to increase its profits so long as it decides to stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.”
The term “ethical business” is seen, by many people, as an oxymoron. This is because a business’s main objective is to make as much money as possible. Making the most money possible, however, can often lead to unethical actions. Companies like Enron, WorldCom, and Satyam have been the posterchildren for how corporations’ greed lead to unethical practices. In recent times however, companies have been accused of being unethical based on, not how they manage their finances, but on how they treat the society that they operate in. People have started to realize that the damage companies have been doing to the world around them is more impactful and far worse than any financial fraud that these companies might be engaging in. Events like the BP oil
Milton Friedman presents a compelling argument in “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits” by arguing that businesses need to focus only on increasing their profits and integrating social responsibility will only hurt them as a company. Since “only people can have responsibilities” (Friedman 52), Friedman argues that businesses as a whole do not have any type of real responsibilities because there is not a singular person for these responsibilities to fall on. Corporate executives are people as well and may feel they have social responsibilities to society but these “are the social responsibilities of individuals, not of business” (51). In terms of corporations, the businessmen are the ones that hold the responsibility of the company. Friedman argues that the only responsibility these managers hold is to those who own the corporation, the shareholders. If the individuals themselves want to contribute to social responsibility they must do it with their own money in their personal lives, but they should not use social responsibility in
Stuart Hart, in a business article, discusses the tough task for companies to make a sustainable global ec...
In today’s fast paced business world many managers face tough decisions when walking the thin line between what’s legal and what’s socially unacceptable. It is becoming more and more important for organisations to consider many more factors, especially ethically, other than maximising profits in order to be more competitive or even survive in today’s business arena. The first part of this essay will discuss managerial ethics[1] and the relevant concepts and theories that affect ethical decision making, such as the Utilitarian, Individualism, Moral rights approach theories, the social responsibility of organisations to stakeholders and their responses to social demands, with specific reference to a case study presenting an ethical dilemma[2], where Mobil halts product sales to a garage, forcing the garage owner to stop selling solvents to young people. The second section of this essay will focus on advice that should be given to any manager in a similar position to the garage owner with relevance to the organisational strategic management, the corporate objective and the evaluation of corporate social performance by measuring economic, legal, ethical and discretionary responsibilities. It will address whom to think of as stakeholders and why the different aspect could cost more than a manager or an organisation could have imagined.
Stakeholder power, business management, organizational culture, and business ethics are factors that impact corporate social responsibility. In this regard, these factors challenged business firms to create positive impact to society and conform to the overriding expectations of consumers at large. Companies receive rising pressure from governments, competitors, and stakeholders to play the leading role in social responsibility by addressing a wide range of environmental, public, and governance concerns – varying from climate change to obesity to human rights – in a company’s supply chain (Bonini et al 2011.). These growing concerns of social groups in political and environmental issues has led companies to generate mechanisms as well as contract between business and society of addressing these issues and entering into a free market agreement.
Covey & Brown (2001) “the role of business in society has progressed over the years, from being primarily concerned with profit for sharehold¬ers to a stakeholder and community approach with a focus on corporate social responsibility”
Stakeholders want to be associated with socially responsible companies, and as such expect them to adhere to a certain standard of behaviour in order to gain their trust. Companies are under strong pressure to behave ethically. They have to earn a ‘license to operate’.
Berenbeim, R. E. (2006, May 12). Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility. Vital Speeches of the Day, pp. 501-504.
As a result of modern corporate scandals and rapid development of international business environments, social responsibility (SR) has become a key aspect of corporate competitive contexts. (Brammer, Williams and Zinkin, 2007). Businesses are under increasing pressure to incorporate SR amongst their profit-driven aims and have become increasingly accountable for their social and environmental actions. Increased interest in CSR developed in the mid 1990s as consumers began to lack their former trust in companies due to both environmental and financial scandals and it became noticeable that society was moving towards values incorporating harmony, quality of life and environmental conservation (Carrasco, 2007) Additionally, major corporate failures over the past two decades have resulted in increased demand for stronger, corporate governance (CG) rules. (Sui, Wright & Evans, 2007). Superior CG rules are needed in order to preserve the integrity of corporations, financial institutions and markets and the health and stability of world economies. (OECD Website)