He argued that the resultant freedom to the individual must be regulated by society to prevent extreme egoism from destroying all social bonds. Resultantly, he saw society as external and independent to individuals, being made up of ‘social facts’ that constrain and shape people’s behaviour to meet society’s functional prerequisites (needs). Durkheim further believed that if any one thing (‘social fact’) exists, it has a function which will help meet society’s needs, the key ones of which are goals (met through political institutions, e.g. parliament), adaptation (meeting members’ material needs, e.g. through the economy), integration (socialising members into the shared values and goals of society, e.g.
Enron’s corporate culture placed its attention on the executives in the corporation and the amount of money that could be made for them (Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. 2010). This is shown through the evaluation of Enron’s compensation plans. These plans tended to show that the corporation was less interested with providing profits for shareholders, and more interested in providing wealth to the executives within the organization. With this information becoming public, I feel that this behavior assisted in the destruction of Enron, leading to the filing of bankruptcy. 2.
(4-7 sentences. 3.0 points) 7. In capitalism, most businesses have a profit motive. Describe at least one reason that businesses with a profit motive may be helpful for society and at least one reason that they may be harmful for society. Then, explain whether you think profit motive is a good thing or a bad thing for society.
How and why have socialists endorsed collectivism? Socialism defines collectivism on the grounds that human beings have all the capacity of human being for collective action. In this way, socialists reject the liberal idea of a self-sufficient and self-contained human creature as well as 'atomised society'. A collective, unified collection of social creatures is capable of overcoming social and economic problems by drawing on the power of the community rather than individual effort. Socialists, therefore, endorsed collectivism to strenghten the idea of fraternity - society is desired to work together while being bounded by sympathy and comradership, that are believed to symbolise the the bonds of common humanity.
How might a company be rewarded or punished for making an ethical or unethical decision? DQ 3: Review the case study “It Seems Right in Theory but Does It Work in Practice?” in Perspectives in Business Ethics. How is ethical theory applied in practice? DQ 4: Review the case study “Where and Why Did Business Ethicists Go Wrong? The Case of Dow Corning Corporation’ in Perspectives in Business ethics.
M7A1: Short Paper: International Games 6 December 2013 Author Note This paper was prepared for BUS 523, Business Ethics for Managers, Taught by… M7A1: Short Paper: International Games Corporations in the United States have different ethical and moral obligations than their foreign competitors. In the global village, there is great diversity among nations. Morals are not the same and are thought of and practiced differently between nations. Managers of multinational corporations have to balance practices here at home with practices overseas. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was signed into law to force US corporations to be more ethical in the global market in their dealings with foreign corporations.
Introduction In an incorporated company, the interests of shareholders are often at odds with the interests of other stakeholders. When making a decision under such circumstances, I will show that the business should balance each group’s interests equitably in order to determine how to act, as a result of a duty owed to each group for their contributions to the company. I will also critique some popular arguments in favour of the commonly held belief that a business should act primarily in its shareholders’ interests. The two competing models The debate about whose interests businesses should act in is dominated by two theories: Shareholder Primacy, and the Stakeholder Model. Under the Stakeholder Model, to answer the question of whose interests
When you break down what a manager means to a business. The manager is so much more than just a manager, their the educator, planner, analyzer, resource and whatever else the company needs to move forward. Whether it’s Amazon, GE or the NBA a manager takes advantage of market inefficiencies or finds previously undiscovered niches. Managers that can take advantage of these findings take on the characteristics of entrepreneurs, however, they are not entrepreneurs because they work to redirect the inputs of existing companies rather than create new forms of product. According to Berri, D. J., Leeds, M. A., Leeds, E. M., & Mondello, M. (2009) Jack Welch, did not create any new financial services, but did transform GE’s focus from manufacturing to financial services at a time when manufacturing was declining.
Drucker (1979) suggest that a corporation or a business should be responsible for the effect it has on its staff, location, or anything it may come in contact with which is considered social responsibility. Friedman (1970) propose that a corporation cannot and do not have social responsibilities, only individual personnel within a corporation. This paper analyzes Cohen (2009) research with four other books to suggest that social responsibility is the responsibility of businesses to its employees, shareholders, and the public in its entirety. The Similarities and Differences of Social Responsibility Dr. Peter Drucker, Dr. William A. Cohen and Milton Friedman have differences and similarities of opinion about social responsibility. Social responsibility within an organization is thoughtful among social, ethnic, economic, and ecological problems, while mainly Dr. Drucker and Dr. Cohen agree, Mr. Friedman believes otherwise.
whose interests it is referring to. Moreover, under section 309 Companies Act 1985, directors were to have regard to the ‘interests of the company's employees in general, as well as the interests of its members.’ This suggested that members and employees could feature in decision making but there was no stipulation as to whose interests were predominant and directorial discretion was arguably too wide. The provision was also quite otiose given that employees had no right of enforcement and reform was needed to restore some clarity.  2. Section 172 CA 2006 Section 172