What is the social responsibility of business free essay sample

Read the Debate on pp. 194-99 (Putting Customers Ahead of Investors by Jack Mackay, and Put Profits First by T. J. Rodgers). Write a 4-5 page argumentative essay arguing for or against this issue: What is the Social Responsibility of Business? Back up your argument with information from these 2 articles as well as using information from at least 2 other websites you have located. The support in your paper must be documented using in-text citations and a Works Cited page (MLA format). For proper documentation format, you may refer to these links as well as those found in the Webliography link under Research/Documentation. What is the Social Responsibility of Business? After reading these articles, I conclude that the social responsibility of a business is to make a profit. Both Friedman and Mackey were arguing the same thing, just painting the picture in different ways. Like the Rorschach inkblot test, they were both describing the same subject, with the same interpretations using different delivery methods. We will write a custom essay sample on What is the social responsibility of business or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Unfortunately capitalism runs the world. Fact is, our society is built off greed and the true Social Responsibility of any and all businesses is to do the bare minimum to lure in enough consumers to be able to make a profit and grow. When I read Putting Customers Ahead of Investors by John Mackey (Chairman and CEO, Whole Foods Market), I was sure that I agreed with his entire philosophy. I realized that I was just temporarily consumed by his better marketing scheme. As I continued to read the other articles Making Philanthropy out of Obscenity by Milton Friedman and Put Profits First by T. J. Rodgers I realized that they were all saying the same things, had the same ideas, and the same goal; to make a profit. In his article Making Philanthropy Out of Obscenity Friedman says, â€Å"Strip off the camouflage, and it turns out we are in essential agreement (pg1). † talking about he and Mackey’s ideas on the social responsibility of business. This became more relevant as I read along. â€Å"At Whole Foods, we measure our success by how much value we can create for all six of our most important stakeholders: customers, team members (employees), investors, vendors, communities, and the environment. † (Mackey, pg1) All businesses adhere to these same rules. Without any one of these stakeholders, a business wouldn’t succeed. â€Å"It is simply good business for a company to cater to its customers, train and retain its employees, build long-term positive relationships with its suppliers, and become a good citizen in its community, including performing some philanthropic activity. When Milton Friedman says a company should stay within the rules of the game and operate without deception or fraud, he means it should deal with all its various constituencies properly in order to maximize long-term shareholder value. † (Rodgers, pg 3) Both Friedman and Mackey realize that a business cannot operate without each of its respective parts working together to accomplish a common goal. Within a business there are many departments. Each of their day to day operational goals may differ but the overall organizational goals remain the same. This is the same for the stakeholders. Each of them are important because they hold stake in the companies well-being. Every company adheres to their stakeholder rules in some way shape or form. Just like the different departments within an organization the goals that the stakeholders want achieved differ from one another but one common goal remains the same. Everyone wants the company to see profit and growth just as the departments within the organization strive for the same. Just as the cells in the human body do different things they are all a part of something much larger than themselves. Look at companies like BP. They cause one of the largest disasters in history and in return, to redeem their public image, they pour millions of dollars into relief funds. Then they spend millions more on marketing, advertisements and public relations to let their customers and stakeholders know that they are working to fight for what society wants them to do; to protect the environment in which they operate in. But, that’s still just the bare minimum that they have to do as they still continue to drill and put the earth at risk every day. Yet, as long as they make the public â€Å"happy† than they will continue to do business as usual. Not until pockets are hurt by their own actions will something change within an organization. â€Å"While Friedman believes that taking care of customers, employees, and business philanthropy are means to the end of increasing investor profits, I take the exact opposite view: Making high profits is the means to the end of fulfilling Whole Foods core business mission†¦ Just as people cannot live without eating, so a business cannot live without profits. But most people dont live to eat, and neither must a business’s live just to make profits † (Mackey, pg 6). They literally are saying the same things, just in a different way. Either way both have to occur. At the end of the day an organization cannot exist without initial capital. That initial capital is generated by investors not by customers. As much as customers are the heart of companies that pump cash into its bloodstream that heart would be useless without the brain that is the entrepreneur and investors. Because of that fact businesses try to keep a difficult balance between pleasing customers and pleasing investors. Investors care about bottom lines while customers can be wooed with glitz and glamour especially when competition is low within that same industry. â€Å"Toward the end of his critique Friedman says his statement that the social responsibility of business [is] to increase its profits and my statement that the enlightened corporation should try to create value for all of its constituencies are equivalent. He argues that maximizing profits is a private end achieved through social means because it supports a society based on private property and free markets. If our two statements are equivalent, if we really mean the same thing, then I know which statement has the superior marketing power. Mine does. † (Mackey,pg 6) It’s true; Mackey does have the better marketing scheme. He makes it sound like, although profit is still the goal, he puts his customers first, which would definitely lure in more consumers. It is all competition within this capitalist society that we live in. In reality, pure capitalism is based on the philosophies of self-interest and individualism mixed with an unregulated economy and private property. In capitalism, the motive for producing goods and services is to sell them for a profit, not to satisfy peoples needs. â€Å"Production is started not by what consumers are prepared to pay for to satisfy their needs but by what the capitalists calculate can be sold at a profit. Those goods may satisfy human needs but those needs will not be met if people do not have sufficient money. † (http://www. worldsocialism. org/articles/what_is_capitalism. php) It is this profit motive of capitalism that is at the root of most of the worlds problems today, from starvation to war, to alienation and crime. Every aspect of our lives is subordinated to the worst excesses of the drive to make profit. We are a greedy and selfish society. Truth be told, our real needs will only ever come a poor second to the requirements of profit in this capitalist society we live in today.