This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Corporates should adopt policies of corporate social responsibility and this should be coupled with adequate government intervention and supervision.
Thesis: Corporate social responsibility is a necessary deterrent to corporate crime, coupled with government intervention will in part sustain business ethical practices which are necessary in the global marketplace.
Background Paragraph: In the past few years, there was a sudden increase in the number of scandals that started to appear.
1st Body Paragraph: Corporations should adopt policies of corporate social responsibility in an attempt to limit the number of scandals that are emerging lately.
2nd Body Paragraph: Another side that is blamed next to the corporate executives is the government.
3rd Body Paragraph: In the opposing point of view, many people disagree with the policies of corporate social responsibility and government intervention.
Conclusion: Corporate businesses should adopt more ethical approaches because this is the way to maintain their profit levels and profit commitment towards their clients.
CSR should be the Concern of Both Corporations and Governments
In recent years, corporations are loosing their credibility due to the fact that we're living in an era of corporate scandals. During the past few years, gigantic corporations have fallen apart. On the top of those are, Arthur Andersen, WorldCom, Global Crossing, HealthSouth, Adelphia and Tyco. In addition, the latest debacle that included Enron shocked the world as it was considered a top ten company in the U.S. According to the article entitled "Enron Scandal at a Glance" Enron grew in a very short while to be the seventh largest company in the U.S. Enron caused a lot of problems for the state of California. At the peak of those, lies the black outs that Enron caused intentionally in order to unethically gain more profit. Those blackouts damaged many people, resulted in the death of many people, and cost the state of California billions of dollars. However, it didn't take a long while before Enron fell apart. Enron filed bankruptcy due to its mounting debts that were kept as a secret from its share holders and even some employees for a long time. Critically analyzing Enron's scandal, economist Paul I. Adujie realized that "the once mighty energy firm, which traded at $90 a share six years ago, is selling for 15Â¢, up 4Â¢ on the day after the verdicts" (Adujie). In his article entitled "The Enron Effect," Adujie argues that shareholders lost about 60 billion dollars in the stock market. That is a tragic incident and someone has to pay the price of lying, cheating, self interest and irresponsibility. However this occurred and the credit goes to Sherron Watkins not the government. She was an Enron employee at the time and sensed that there was something going wrong. It started when she was reviewing an Enron's accounting document and found simply that the math didn't add up. She sent a letter to Ken lay and later testified against Enron. A lot of people considered the board of directors including Fastow, Skillings, and Ken Lay as the major suspects as they were the ones giving orders; while others considered the government to be responsible of all what's happening due to their weak regulations which corporations adhere to and their inadequate supervision. This raised an important issue about the way these kinds of scandals can be impeded. A valid answer for this question should manipulate both corporations and governments. While corporations should adopt policies of Corporate Social Responsibility, governments too should be more involved in this concern by issuing effective laws that should be strictly followed by corporations.
Enron's scandal is an example of corporate irresponsibility that has been spread during the last decade. In fact, there was a sudden increase in the number of scandals that started to appear in the past few years. Enron exposes the unethical approaches that can be used by corporate managers to deceive customers and maximize profit, disregarding the consequences of their act. This lies in direct contradiction to the communist principles, which require that corporations should be guided only by the benefit of the society. Actually, the increase in the number of corporate crimes may be considered an extreme implementation of Adam Smith's theory, which advocates that corporations are guided by their own benefit only, not that of the society. However, it may be argued that corporate executive should be reliable and responsible people as they hold in their hands the jobs of thousands of employees. Any irresponsible act that could be as a result of greediness could result in causing the corporate to fall apart. A clear illustration of this is the case of Enron. We all saw what happens to corporations as a result of their greed. Skilling, Fastow, and Lay were all unmoral executives. As a result of their irresponsible and unethical acts to suppress their greed, the corporation fell apart and all its employees lost their jobs. Moreover governments are being accused for their poor supervision and their insufficient regulations. Those regulations contain lucrative loophole in which some corporates take advantage of in a negative way. As we saw, Enron took advantage of this loophole and their plan was simple economics. When there are not enough resources to supply the demand, the price of a good (energy) increases. An attempt to prevent corporate crimes, corporate social responsibility is a necessary deterrent, coupled with government intervention; this will in part sustain business ethical practices which are necessary in the global marketplace
Corporations should adopt policies of corporate social responsibility in an attempt to limit the number of scandals that are emerging lately. Corporate Social Responsibility is operating a business in a matter that meets or exceeds the ethical, legal, commercial, and public expectations that society has of business. Corporate social responsibility can lead corporations on the right path. It provides a balance between profit and social responsibility which most corporation lack nowadays. Furthermore, it helps gain the corporation a good reputation which is an imperative element in such a business. In an era where the board of directors and people who hold high ranks in corporations only think about money, it is necessarily to adopt such a policy. Due to the rising number of scandals that have occurred in the past few years, there has been a controversy about who should be blamed for the falling apart of these corporations. According to the article entitled The Social Responsibility of Business is to increase its profits, Friedman argues that the people who should be held responsible are corporate executives. Corporate executives are responsible of their employee's actions due to the fact that they are the ones giving the orders. The difficulty of exercising "social responsibility" illustrates, of course, the great virtue of private competitive enterprise-it forces people to be responsible for their own actions and makes it difficult for them to "exploit" other people for either selfish or unselfish purposes. They can do good-but only at their own expense. (Friedman). Executives should be ethical and moral people who aren't only busy with their self-indulgence and achieving maximum profit. However that doesn't mean that achieving maximum profit is unethical but it should be done in the right way. Corporate social responsibility can make a balance between maximum profit and social responsibility. For example, a company like Enron achieved maximum profit and gave high wages but it fell apart in a short while and suddenly due to the fact that its main characters and ways of doing the business were immoral and unethical. In addition, 5,600 people lost their jobs when Enron filed for bankruptcy. Therefore, it can be concluded that when huge corporations collapse, their employees suffer because they lose their jobs; hence, social irresponsibility can hurt corporations, employees, and societies at large.
When corporations become reluctant to adopt policies of social responsibility, the government should react by imposing strict laws that monitor the performance of corporations to ensure the implementation of corporate responsibility. In many instances, governments are accused of being irresponsive and weak in regard to the implantation of social responsibility. Governments start enforcing new laws and regulations only when a debacle occurs. They never take that first step, otherwise something gigantic must give them a wake up call and then they begin functioning. When the laws that monitor the performance of corporations are weak and ineffective, the result will be an extension to the Enron phenomenon. This is evident in the case of the United States, which has a law referred to as "Sarbanes-Oxley" Act, and issued as a result of the Enron Case. As noted in the Cato Hand book for Congress, this law did not take any serious step towards preventing scandals similar to the case of Enron. What the law invented is just a new bureau that has no clearly-defined regulations to follow in case of corporation fraud. Alan Reynolds, a senior fellow in the Cato Institute, notes that Sarbanes-Oxley law requires that the CEO and CFO should certify that "their financial statements fairly represent financial conditions and results" (Reynolds). This item of the law contains loosely defined terms, such as 'fairly' and 'financial conditions.' These broad terms make the law ineffective as it becomes hard for law enforces to recognize when the financial statement is 'fairly' acceptable and when it is not. Accordingly, governments should provide strong regulations that are null and void of loopholes. As seen on the documentary about Enron, it was obvious that the government didn't perform its tasks properly. For example, how could the recordings of the traders discussions take so long to be examined. These recording were looked upon several years after they were recorded. In addition, the fact that a top 10 company (Enron) in the U.S is incapable of producing a balance sheet should have attracted the government attention so long ago. The governments irresponsibility results in providing loopholes that corrupted corporations take advantage of in an unethical way. In his article entitled "How to Give Business a Soul," economist Googins Bradely argues that the reason of all those surfacing scandals is due to the government lack of involvement. Moreover, the government should hire internal cops as Webber discusses in his article entitled The New Ethics Enforcers. He argues that these internal cops have the right to review confidential documents, interview any officials, and even fire executives that are suspected to be guilty of fraud. These internal cops are spread over 45 countries and have handled more than 100 cases. Although it is nearly impossible to absolutely prevent such scandals, it is feasible to limit the number of Enrons that might occur on the future.
Despite the benefit of government intervention in corporate performance, many people disagree with the fact that governments should interfere in order to ensure the implementation of corporate social responsibility. Some corporate owners argue that government intervention in business is an obstacle in the way of achieving success as a corporation. A lot of people agree with the free market policy. In his article which is entitled, "The Moral Mission of Business," Thomas M. Mulligan expresses the opposing view to corporate social responsibility when he declares that "business should not directly consider moral issues when it makes decisions" (Mulligan). According to this view, the main aim of a free market is to maximize profit while disregarding moral issues. That applies to most people because the bottom line is that people are interested in money more thank any thing else. Just as some US corporations may be happy with the bombing of Iraq because of the increase in the price of oil, other corporations may be glad when they see that their profit is maximized, even if this profit maximization is reached on the expense of social irresponsibility. That's why many business owners and economists are against the imposition of any laws that allows the government to interfere in the performance of corporations. In the article "The New Ethics Enforcers," Weber Joseph argues that the recent US laws that allow the government to monitor corporations closely are damaging the business. Some executives are arguing that the government's over involvement is actually bothering entrepreneurs. However, adopting policies of corporate social responsibility is the right choice to make. Although it may sometimes results in lowering the profits, there are more important factors than financial matters. The free market ignores important matters such as morals and ethics. Although there are so many imperatives that force corporate businesses to adopt false policies in order to keep a positive image in front of their clients, this positive image is definitely going to collapse when the fraud is revealed; a fact which means that adopting Corporate social responsibility benefits rather than harms the image of the companies. Furthermore, government intervention should be embraced rather than opposed. The government involvement provides safer working conditions; also there is adequate supervision in order to make sure that the corporation and especially its executives aren't engaged in any illegal acts that could result in damaging the corporate and its employees.
At last, in an era of corporate scandals, corporates should adopt policies of corporate social responsibility and this should be coupled with adequate government intervention and supervision. Corporate businesses should adopt more ethical approaches because this is the way to maintain their profit levels and profit commitment towards their clients. Finally, businesses have to give an ethical model which contributes to the integrity of the whole society. In that sense, corporations should cooperate with governments in order to ensure the implementation of corporate social responsibility for the benefit of individuals, corporations, and societies.
Adujie, Paul I. "CNN Attacks On Nigerians In Houston & Why Nigeria's Image Matters." 04 June 2006. 30 June. 2006. <http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/index.php/content/view/3186/46/>
Berenson, Alex. "The Other Legacy of Enron." Vol. 155 Issue 535935/28/2006 1-4. 16-6-2006 <http://0-search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt.edu:80/login.aspx?direct =true&db=aph&an=20957542>.
Bradely, Googins. "How to give business a soul.." US companies are learning that they
can no longer compete on quality and technology alone. They need reputations, too. Vol. 129 Issue 451111/06/2000 (16/6/2006) <http://0search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt .edu:80/login.aspx? direct=true&db=aph&an=3746838>.
"Cato Handbook for Congress." Policy Recommendations for the 108th Congress. Cato Institute. Washington D.C. 02 July, 2006.
Fulton, Greg, Wendy Grossman, Kingsbury Kathleen. "THE ENRON EFFECT.." The
bosses take the fall for a criminal corporate flameout. What has changed, and why it will never, ever, ever happen again. Maybe Vol. 167 Issue 236/5/2006 p34-35. 18/6/2006) <http://0search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt.edu:80/lo gin.aspx?direc t=true&db=aph&an=20968973>.
Friedman, Milton. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. 13 Sept 1970. U. of Colorado at Boulder. 11 May 2006. <http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc- resp-business.html>.
Friedman, Milton. "Rethinking The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits." A reason debate featuring Milton Friedman, Whole Foods' John Mackey, and Cypress Semiconductor's T.J. Rodgers Vol. 37 Issue 5, p28-3710/2005 1-3. (21/6/2006) <http://0-search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt.edu:80/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an= 18255927>.
Joseph, Weber. "The New Ethics Enforcers ." These corporate cops have unprecedented
power to throw their weight around Issue 39712/13/2006 p76-77. (18/6/2006) <http://0-search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt.edu:80/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=19572409>.
Mclean, Bethany and Ekind Peter. "THE GUILTIEST GUYS IN THE ROOM ." Vol. 153 Issue 116/12/2006 1-18. 16-6-2006 <http://0-search.epnet.com.lib.aucegypt.edu:80/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=21114909>.
Mulligan, Thomas M. "The Moral Mission of Business." 01 July, 2006. <http://spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~mulligan/Mulligan_moral_mission_of_business02.pdf>
Reynolds, Alan. "Sarbanes-Oxley Act in Retrospect." The Cato Institute. 02 July, 2006.
Sebor, Jessica. "SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: ARE COMPANIES FAKING IT?." Vol. 10 Issue 5May2006 p13-13. (21/6/2006) <http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true &db=aph&an=20714349>