Based
on the three readings in chapter 3A of the textbook, each author focuses major social
responsibilities on different actors (Jennings, 2012). In my opinion, Friedman
places these on employees since he claims that organizations are “artificial
persons”; therefore, “artificial responsibilities” are created and get in the
way of regulation and direct responsibility. I support part of his argument
since individuals ultimately decide what path a business will take based on
their decisions. If these decisions benefit companies, but not the communities
where they are imbedded, an artificial person or a group of artificial
individuals will not be able to pay their responsibility. While they can claim
success in the business, they should also claim responsibility for their
actions in representation of a business. The part of this argument I don’t
agree with is that focusing on the employees. This tenet is ultimately placing
the stakeholder in a position of greater power and control in which
stakeholders hold less accountability for the consequences of their company’s
actions.
In the case of the work of Freeman,
stakeholders are recognized as a more integral part of the ethical
repercussions of business activities. They are not only an entity that
employees want to only deliver great results to (Jennings, 2012). What I mean
by this is that Freeman recognizes the influence of stakeholders on employee
relationships and behaviors and includes a bigger picture of their influence on
the ethical profile of organizations to a greater extent. Ultimately, business
are mostly successful via contributions of all shareholders (including
employees). In my understanding, he views companies a teams, in which
leadership has the greater influence, but actions are collective. Therefore, their
social responsibility is shared. Still, this theory recognizes that the
influence of business in society is such that they enable a lot of factors that
lead to the functioning of communities via employment, products and other forms
of social and economic activity. The inclusion of all actors in business is
very important. Still, Freeman refers to competition and government as
non-shareholders. This is a correct assumption, I concur, but limited
(recognized by the author himself). These two factors are essential ingredients
of the strategic planning of companies and affect their day-to-day operations.
The work of Entine and Jennings
gives a “soul” to an organization. In this case, the concept refers to the
interactions and perceptions of these interactions in society. Individuals have
an opinion, a feeling, or a reaction to a business (Jennings, 2012). Good or
bad, realistic or unrealistic, voluntarily or involuntarily and convenient or
inconvenient; organizations work to reach out and interact with people in many
different ways (direct transactions, environmentally, through media, marketing
and etcetera). This thinking brings in the individual role of all stakeholders
and their collective effect in society and gives an organization the concept of
a real entity that as such has to manage its workers and its image via
corporate social responsibility. The authors also recognize that there are
limits to the ethical correctness of organization. For example, Exxon was
mentioned in this manuscript and compared to other companies that can claim
“green marketing strategies” without being viewed as a lack of honesty (or sort
of sarcastic to a point). Such companies (those in fossil energy sources)
recognize that is a challenge not to fall in contradictions when claiming some
sort of environmental benefit to their products. Is better for them to operate
their image strategies focusing on other aspects of their field. Entine and
Jenning’s approach integrates the role of stakeholders and society in business
and how the organizations are seen as “conscious entities”.
I think it is interesting to see how
each manuscript brings in important points on how individuals and corporations
ethically interact. This chapter has raised a series of questions for me. If
the concept of businesses has evolved to the point that as humans we can
conceptualize them as having a “soul” or a consciousness per say, what do
individuals and governments need to do modernize their interaction with
organizations to that same level? Is that even happening or has that happened?
More to think about as part of this class.
Works
cited
Jennings, M. (2012). Business
ethics: case studies and selected readings. 7th ed. Mason, OH South-Western
Cengage Learning.
ISBN: 9780538473538
No comments:
Post a Comment