Should Firms Encourage The Environment And Support The Community

In the article, “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Profits,” Friedman states that “businessmen believe that they are defending free enterprise when they proclaim that business is not concerned merely with profit but also with promoting desirable social ends.” This social responsibility is defined as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), which is the belief that “corporations owe a greater duty to their communities and stakeholders” by having a “social conscience.” This, among other things, includes being environmentally responsible, contributing to non-profit organizations, and eliminating discrimination.

The ethical issues presented in this case are the different views that each individual has on how the idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This dispute is between Mr. Milton Friedman, John Mackey, and T.J. Rodgers; all of which has a different outlook on CSR. The definition of CSR refers to the responsibilities that business has to the society in which it operates and to those actions that a business can be held accountable. Most philosophers have come up with three different types of responsibilities that corporations can be held accountable for. The first and most important of the three is a corporation’s duty to not cause harm. If a corporation can

Many believe that business entities should have an ethical duty to be socially responsible, to work towards increasing its positive effects on society while decreasing its negative effects. Many organizations look for opportunities to be socially responsible while also creating shareholder wealth.

A triple bottom line model never merely quantifies an accomplishment or rather the wellbeing of a company through its conventional monetary bottom line. However, triple bottom line similarly measures social, ethical as well as environment performance of the company. Triple bottom line typically is an incessant process that shall assist the company in concentrating into the performance of a more sustainable business whereas demonstrating to local communities together with employees of that particular firm that is not merely looking forward on profit making, but similarly a greater common good for the company operations (Hitchcock and Willard, 2009).

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is something that affects all companies and should be an active factor in the company’s decision making. It is something all corporations need to care about. CSR is when business’ or corporations take part in an initiative or campaign for a cause that will benefit society and/or in some way make the world a better place (Taylor, 2015). Initially, Corporate Social Responsibility started to take shape around the 1950’s, but some say that it dates all the way back to the 1800s, the idea of CSR was seen (Carroll, 2007). One may think that because it is dated so long ago, it doesn’t have an important impact today nevertheless, it is proven that Corporate Social Responsibility is a pathway for entities to self benefit as they are in the process of benefitting society.

In the world of economics sustainable capitalism ranks high as far as corporate social responsibility (CSR) is regarded. In 1994, the founder of SustainAbility, John Elkington, coined the term “the triple bottom line” (The Economist Limited Newspaper, 2009). Elgington’s theory concluded that companies should look at profit in a different manner by looking at the bigger picture. The triple bottom line (TBL) is a phrase that represents people, planet and profit. Instead of companies only measuring the financial aspect of the organization, they were to also report on the social and environmental performance as well. In order to have a responsible organization, the social and environmental aspect needs to be measured

The triple bottom line is used in business programs now days to make sure that businesses are more valuable, thus this is wrong to say that social responsibility or moral courage are more present in businesses now days. This is the right time when CSR is discussed in companies, no matter it is advertisement or production process CSR is considered important. This is another truth that stakeholders now want to invest in such companies only which are having high social responsibility. This is the reason that famous brands such as Coca Cola is involved in educating plenty of children who cannot afford education and Wal-Mart the best retail store of world is looking for such vendors who produce environment friendly product such as energy saving bulbs and so on. In traditional business the term bottom line is used to express profit or loss, there are social judges present along with environmentalist who are judging this bottom line and adding various aspects in it to improve business working, (Elkington, 1998) thus the triple bottom line is not about profit and loss in monetary terms only but it is much more than that, this is more about health awareness of workers and different healthy working aspects. If a firm is having good profit but workers here are dying because of unhealthy working conditions then this is not an effective CSR firm as per environmentalist

Friedman saw CSR as an additional business cost factor that made the financial equilibrium more difficult to maintain. In this sense, M. Friedman (1962 and 1970) saw CSR as a “subversive doctrine” and he said that the sole responsibility of the business is to increment profits.

The benefit to business of good Corporate Social Responsibility is difficult to quantify as it varies depending on the nature of the enterprise. Some scholars believe that there is a business justification for CSR. That is, what is good for the environment and society will be good for company profitability. And studies have shown a slightly positive correlation between CSR and financial gain (Steiner and Steiner, 2006). However, as Freidmanism claims, the first responsibility of business is to make enough profit to cover the costs for the future. If this social responsibility is not met, no other responsibilities can be (Hargreaves, 2006). Therefore it is critical that CSR activities are included in strategy formulation and that the level of resources devoted to CSR is determined like any other strategy – through cost/benefit analysis. Corporations will not throw money away…they need to see it

A triple bottom line model never merely quantifies an accomplishment or rather the wellbeing of a company through its conventional monetary bottom line. However, triple bottom line similarly measures social, ethical as well as environment performance of the company. Triple bottom line typically is an incessant process that shall assist the company in concentrating into the performance of a more sustainable business whereas demonstrating to local communities together with employees of that particular firm that is not merely looking forward on profit making, but similarly a greater common good for the company operations (Hitchcock and Willard, 2009).

Numerous debates have been waging over the past few years among business elites about the whether or not a corporate entity has a responsibility to society. It’s an extremely interesting topic with real and global ramifications that impact nearly every person and animal on this planet in one form or another. Anyone who owns public shares in a company has invested hard-earned money into a corporation based upon their perception that the company will be profitable and sustainable. The corporation’s board of directors are then responsible to manage the company in such a way as to increase their share-holders’ investment. For hundreds of years, this attempt to increase a corporation’s worth was done with little or no interest in social responsibility. Until very recently this topic was not very much in the public eye. However, at the moment the global economy is rapidly changing and business transparency is increasing through the accessibility of information across the world. Social and global change is moving faster than ever and progressing through this century any business will undoubtedly need to keep up to remain profitable. More mature business students will certainly recall being bombarded with the idea that the only responsibility of a corporation was to increase the value of the company and maximize long-term shareholder wealth without regard to ethics or social obligations. Is there a correlation that occurs between large multinational corporations and their

Porter and Kramer take a very different stance on this topic. They believe that there is a very real and strong link between CSR and competitive analysis. The modern world ranks businesses on their CSR and directs a significant amount of publicity towards companies who are focused on the health and welfare of their customers and the earth. The traditional mindset concerning CSR puts business and society at odds, when in reality they are interdependent and reliant on each other. Porter & Kramer think that antiquated thoughts about CSR have pressured businesses into thinking that there is an only one generic approach to CSR. This one-size-fits-all mindset does not actually fit all, and it is in no way the best for all business strategies. Porter & Kramer believe this mindset leads to a disconnected and

This discussion will begin with one of the earliest and most quoted critiques of CSR by Milton Friedman (1970). Friedman’s view was that an employee has a responsibility to conduct the business according to the owner’s desire, which is generally to make as much money as possible, while conforming to the basic rules of society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom (Friedman, M., 1970). Friedman goes on to state that if a person has responsibilities to his family, his city, his church etc. then these are the social responsibilities of individuals, not business (Friedman, M., 1970). According to Friedman, nothing that takes the focus away from

A triple bottom line model never merely quantifies an accomplishment or rather the wellbeing of a company through its conventional monetary bottom line. However, it similarly measures social, ethical as well as environment performance of the company. Triple bottom line typically is an incessant process that shall assist the company in concentrating into the performance of a more sustainable business whereas demonstrating to local communities together with employees of that particular firm that it is not merely looking forward on profit making, but similarly a greater common good for the company operations (Hitchcock and Willard, 2009).

First important arguments against CSR come from Friedman (2007). He argues that CSR is not in the shareholders’ interest and the idea that companies have a responsibility to act in the public interest and will profit from doing so is fundamentally flawed.. He argues that moral responsibility of the company is also to maximize the benefits for its shareholder. And spending