Consequences of Friedman's Shareholder Theory for Hrm Ethics and Alternative Perspectives

It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the

It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the

What is ethically responsible management? How can a corporation, given its economic mission, be managed with appropriate attention to ethical concerns? These are central questions in the field of business ethics. There are two approaches to answering such questions. The first one is Milton Friedman’s shareholder theory of management and the second one is Edwards Freeman’s “Stakeholder” theory of management, two different views about the purpose and aims of a business.

Some who are only chasing for profit regards ethics as barrier. However, lots of researcher approve that managerial ethics are not mutually exclusive with profitability.

Unethical practices of business managements are also tough for the employees who get confused whether to do what is right or just avoid complications and go with the flow. Solomon states that

To highlight this, I will look at more specifically at capitalist organisation ANZ and cooperative Mondragon Cooperative Corporation and how they deal with the potential ethical dilemmas of fair wages for employees and executive remuneration.

Dyck and Neubert  (2012) defined  ethics  as "[A] set of principles or moral standards   that  differentiate right  from  wrong". It is a way of determining the morality of any action. It is important that managers adhere to ethical principles that will guide them in making appropriate and ethical decisions for the company. Thus, Roger Berg, being Vice-President of Planning at The Lake Corporation  plays a significant role in the company in ensuring that decisions are made without tarnishing management ethics. He must face and weather through the challenges caused by other sources that could put him in ethical dilemma situations and push him to render management decisions violating ethics.

In their theories of how a business should operate, R. Edward Freeman and Milton Friedman hold virtually opposite beliefs as to what businesses’ responsibilities should be. In favor of the Stakeholder theory, Freeman believes that any person or organization that has a “stake” in the business should also play a role of participation in the business’s actions and decisions. In the other corner of the ring stands Milton Friedman, who holds the belief that said business is only responsible for those that actually own stock in the business – the owners, or stockholders.

The problem to be investigated is the conflict that can arise within companies between doing what is right (or moral) and doing what is often viewed as more important the attainment of corporate goals. This conflict is highlighted in the case study involving Fannie Mae (FM). (Jennings, 2009) In this case, corporate executives choose to focus on corporate goals and meeting the market expectations, ignoring any moral issued witch conflicted with the attainment of their goal. (Jennings, 2009) To understand the reasons for the executives actions and learn from their mistakes and misjudgments the following topics are reviewed: 1) ethics and social responsibility, 2) the importance of devolution, 3) the power and value of incentive plans, 4)

This essay will aim to investigate the ethical treatment of shareholders and workers in a traditional, capitalist corporation; The Ford Motor Company and compare and contrast the findings with the treatment of these stakeholders in the Mondragon Cooperative Corporation. The structure of this essay will be as follows; firstly the fundamental differences between the two contrasting organisations will be examined and how these differences impact the ethical treatment of the relevant stakeholders; secondly, the ethical treatment of shareholders in regards to corporate governance and the executive’s accountability and control will be investigated, and lastly, the ethical treatment of workers within the two contrasting organisations will be

This paper will have a detailed discussion on the shareholder theory of Milton Friedman and the stakeholder theory of Edward Freeman. Friedman argued that “neo-classical economic theory suggests that the purpose of the organisations is to make profits in their accountability to themselves and their shareholders and that only by doing so can business contribute to wealth for itself and society at large”. On the other hand, the theory of stakeholder suggests that the managers of an organisation do not only have the duty towards the firm’s shareholders; rather towards the individuals and constituencies who contribute to the company’s wealth, capacity and activities. These individuals or constituencies can be the shareholders, employees,

Milton Friedman dictates that firms' primary responsibility is to maximize shareholder revenue and should overcome all hindrances in the environment to do so. This would include having employees work long hours, maintaining high prices or even side lining the importance of environmental safety.

Ethical stewardship is a concept that fosters policies of fairness to all. Ethical stewards use guiding principles that are ethical and moral. Caldwell states that” The concept of ethical stewardship has its roots in stakeholder theory” (Caldwell et al., 2007, p. 154). Stakeholder theory is very similar to Milton Friedman’s classical theory of business, which essentially holds that businesses should be solely devoted to increasing profits (Friedman, 1970, para 33). This author contends that ethical stewardship can’t exist

In light of the recent scandals that rose around big multinationals such as Enron and WorldCom, it has become evident that reform in the traditional corporate operations and objectives was to be encompassed in the organisations corporate strategies. Indeed throughout the years, companies main objectives were defined primarily as being economic objectives, Multinationals developed with sight of profit maximisations regardless to the other incentives, Friedman considered that to be the foundation for a well-managed company, it was further considered that the financing of any other sort of social corporate activities rather unnecessary. The expenses were regarded as expenditures for the owners and investors; this was a time where shareholders rights were regarded as conflicting with other constituents namely the employees, creditors, customers or the community in general. However this interpretation is seen as rather inadequate due to the nature of the amalgamated relation between both constituents. Stakeholders in modern corporate doctrine are considered as a core apparatus for the well functioning of a business. It is however often argued that the only way for a corporation to achieve better results and maximise its profits is to include other people in the process, individuals or organisations with direct or indirect interest in the well performance of the company, that is the reason why modern regulations and codes include a number of stakeholders other than the

As the world is turning out to be more aggressive and unstable than any other time in recent memory, producing based enterprises are looking to increase upper hand at all cost and are swinging to more inventive sources through HRM practices (Sparrow, Schuler, & Jackson, 1994). HR practices has been defined by (Smallbusiness.chron.com, 2016) as “the means through which your human resources personnel can develop the leadership of your staff.”