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
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
Business ethics are the moral principles that describe the way a business behaves. Because businesses are treated as “persons”, it can be said that the same principles that determine an individual’s actions can also apply to business. Making ethical choices involves distinguishing between right and wrong, and then making the right choice; and while it can be easy to identify unethical business practices, such as using child labor or not paying employees properly, good ethical practice can be harder to define simply because what is deemed right is not always universally accepted. In other words, everyone has a unique moral compass, and can see black and white as different shades of gray. In the face of this, every business holds corporate social responsibility to act fairly for their employees’, stakeholders’, and sometimes even the earth’s sake. However, whether or not the business adheres to this ethical paradigm varies.
An increasing large number of firms are developing mission statements that also attempt to define the social and ethical boundaries of their strategic domain. Some firms are actively pursuing social programs they believe to be intertwined with their economic objectives, while others simply seek to manage their businesses according to the principles of sustainability – meeting humanity’s needs without harming future generations. For example, Unilever has launched a variety of programs to help developing nations wrestle with poverty, water scarcity, and the effects of climate change. The firm’s motives are at least as much economic as moral. As environmental regulations grow stricter around the world, the firm must invest in green technologies or its leadership
Before evaluating the writing of these authors, it would seem appropriate to state the generally accepted definitions of the terms “social responsibility” and “business ethics”. Paraphrased from several different sources, business ethics can be defined as the written (and frequently ‘unwritten’) principles that guide the actions and decisions of a company. Mainly driven by the organizational culture, they determine both the good and bad behavior and set the standards for decision making. In its most basic form, business ethics comes down to knowing the difference between right and wrong and choosing to do what is right because it is right rather than simply avoiding what is wrong because of its negative r...
1, 2010). Incorporating sustainability into business goals and culture has become more than just the ethical thing to do, it can give a company a competitive advantage and increase their bottom line returns (Oppenheim & Stuchtey, 2015). Additionally, businesses that practice environmental ethics such as reducing emissions, efficient allocation of scarce resources, recycling, and reducing energy consumption benefit from increased trust and brand loyalty (Ewing-Chow & Soh, 2009). Some ethical activities, such as reduced energy consumption, have obvious benefits for a company because they reduce the cost of production. For a financial institution, electronic banking channels can decrease labor costs while electronic statements reduce cost of production. Both of these are environmentally beneficial as electronic banking channels allow customers to conduct business without driving to a brick-and-mortar branch and electronic statements reduce paper consumption. An added soft benefit is as customers enjoy the convenience of these services brand loyalty is expanded for the bank. Corporations that do not demonstrate environmental ethics may suffer adverse consequences. For example, a company that is caught illegally dumping toxic waste will not only face fines and potential criminal charges, but public fallout as consumers may boycott the company’s product to show such behavior will not be tolerated. For all these reasons, it is vital that companies address environmental concerns in their ethics
In today’s society, corporations are expected to be socially responsible. Drucker (1981) stated that this is a growing trend or chic for businesses to conduct in an ethical manner. These organizations are socially responsible if they partake in performing duties that will benefit the humanity. Any unethical mistake can tarnish the company’s reputation. The audience associates the reputation in making various choices, such as investment, career, and relation. The major issues that have resulted to the downfall of corporations and financial institutions include fraud, suspicious business valuation, money laundering, post-acquisition disputes and corporate economic damage caused by the breach of contracts and torts (Silverstone & Sheetz, 2012).
The importance of ethics and values in business sustainability is undeniable. Ethics has been defined as, “Moral principles that govern or influence a person’s behaviour”- Hornby. Ethics is different from business ethics however, business ethics is defined as “Written or unwritten codes of principles or values that govern decisions and actions within an organisation”. Therefore we can see that the ethics, moral standards and behaviour of the consumers, employees, entrepreneurs or management teams does not concern business ethics.
William S. Laufer, Journal of Business Ethics March 2003, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 253-261 Social Accountability and Corporate Greenwashing, DOI 10.1023/A:1022962719299
Economists say that the main goal of a business is to maximize its profits. According to the canonical view a business or a corporation has completed the task of the social responsibility with this maximization, always of course by obeying the laws. But the question that arises under this consumption is whether or not a company must be ethical and behave to its employers and its customers as if it was a good and moral citizen; or as the book says `'a good citizen''.
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.
While the concept of an individual having responsibility is commonly recognized, modern views have lead to the emerging issue of corporate responsibility. Business Directory.com defines corporate social responsibility as, “A company’s sense of responsibility towards the community and environment (both ecological and social) in which it operates. Companies express this citizenship (1) through their waste and pollution reduction processes, (2) by contributing educational and social programs, and (3) by earning adequate returns on the employed resources.” But such a concept has been much disputed since at least the 1970’s.
“Unless humanity is suicidal, it should want to preserve, at the minimum, the natural life-support systems and processes required to sustain its own existence” (Daily p.365). I agree with scientist Gretchen Daily that drastic action is needed now to prevent environmental disaster. Immediate action and changes in attitude are not only necessary for survival but are also morally required. In this paper, I will approach the topic of environmental ethics from several related sides. I will discuss why the environment is a morally significant concern, how an environmental ethic can be developed, and what actions such an ethic would require to maintain and protect the environment.
Stuart Hart, in a business article, discusses the tough task for companies to make a sustainable global ec...
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)
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’.