Corporate Social Responsibilities of Reebok

Corporate Social Responsibility is an important term that few know of. This term stands for everything that’s moral, from using less harmful chemicals in their products to protecting the rights of the workers and the society we live in. However, some companies do not live by this word. This, coupled with the massive amount of consumers buying their products, can cause a multitude of problems not only for the company workers, but to the world itself. As such, companies should become more aware of their effects on the world around them and change their moral responsibilities to treat their workers more humanely, protect the lives of the people in their towns, cities and countries and save the environment from further destruction and pollution.

Because corporations are established to profit and shareholders invest money with expectations of a greater return, managers cannot be given a directive to be “socially responsible” without providing specific criteria of checks and balances to which needs to adhere. Therefore, it is imperative to the success of a corporation for managers to not act solely but rather to act within the policies of the shareholders.

There are conflicting expectations of the nature of a company’s responsibilities to society. However, those companies that undertake what may be termed ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ must decide; what are the actual social responsibilities of these companies? I will present a possible paradigm. Also, I will look at the benefit to the business that employs proper management as compared the business with poor management. This research paper describes my view of corporate social responsibility and compares the social responsibilities of Delta Air Lines and Spirit

The ethical issues presented in this case are the different views that each individual has on how the idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This dispute is between Mr. Milton Friedman, John Mackey, and T.J. Rodgers; all of which has a different outlook on CSR. The definition of CSR refers to the responsibilities that business has to the society in which it operates and to those actions that a business can be held accountable. Most philosophers have come up with three different types of responsibilities that corporations can be held accountable for. The first and most important of the three is a corporation’s duty to not cause harm. If a corporation can

Many believe that business entities should have an ethical duty to be socially responsible, to work towards increasing its positive effects on society while decreasing its negative effects. Many organizations look for opportunities to be socially responsible while also creating shareholder wealth.

The expectation that businesses behave responsibly and positively contribute to society all while pursuing their economic goals is one that holds firm through all generations. Stakeholders, both market and nonmarket, expect businesses to be socially responsible. Many companies have responded to this by including this growing expectation as part of their overall business operations. There are companies in existence today whose sole purpose is to socially benefit society alongside businesses who simply combine social benefits with their economic goals as their company mission. These changes in societal expectations and thus company purpose we’ve seen in the business community over time often blurs the line of what it means to be socially

Corporate ethics and social responsibility work together. Corporations must show concern for the welfare of both their owners and society. Corporations must commit to maintaining integrity, fairness, and respect. However, even well-intentioned activities of businesses can end up not doing any good at all. Listen to this audio clip located in this week’s Electronic Reserve Readings to see how. Describe the challenges one business faced in the audio clip. Explain in what ways the good intentions of this business turned out to be not so good.

The corporate world has an unfavorable view of itself by being selfish, evil, and against the average American. Companies market themselves and their products in certain ways that makes them and their products appealing to everyone and if not everyone then a certain group of people. Every company has a mission to follow and values to go by, but some companies lack ethics and morals. In this paper I am going to talk about one company that engages in ethical behavior and another that doesn’t.

Growing competition and the ever increasing emphasis on cost reduction and efficiency has caused many firms to outsource various components of their operations outside of the country. As firms are thrusted into the global marketplace and transformed into multinational corporations (MNCs), new challenges arise related to the differences/disparity in corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices between countries (Chandler & Werther Jr., 2014; Cruz, 2013). Globalization has increased companies need to consider the importance and strategic value of CSR (Chandler & Werther Jr., 2014; Cruz, 2013).

Corporate social responsibility has been one the key business buzz words of the 21st century. Consumers' discontent with the corporation has forced it to try and rectify its negative image by associating its name with good deeds. Social responsibility has become one of the corporation's most pressing issues, each company striving to outdo the next with its philanthropic image. People feel that the corporation has done great harm to both the environment and to society and that with all of its wealth and power, it should be leading the fight to save the Earth, to combat poverty and illness and etc. "Corporations are now expected to deliver the good, not just the goods; to pursue

Some business leaders are taking good moral decisions and the reason behind that idea is that the core part of their business strategy is to create mutual benefit for both wider society and business as well. The growing desire of top management is to find out ways to create mutual benefit for both the organizations and the stake holders but the public still believes that companies are greedy entities which make decisions only in their self-interest, even at the cost of greater public welfare. It is the utmost obligation of the companies to discern the social issues while making the decisions (Yashiro, Yoshida and Suzuki, no date; Godwin, 2006; Schwab, 1996; Godwin, 2008; Werhane, 1998; Werhane, 2002; Heath, 2008; Mehalik and Gorman, 2006).

Crane, A. and Matten, D. (2010) ‘Corporate social responsibility’, (3rd edition) Business Ethics. Oxford: Oxford university press, pp.51-60

The integrative model of social responsibility, which involves the stakeholder theory and moral minimum theory, and the philosophical ethical theory of utilitarianism are the most responsible approaches to business because they involve the standards of knowing who your actions affect, knowing how to help the most people possible, and knowing how to benefit those who are left out of the positive externalities of a business decision. This paper will discuss the implications of these theories in further depth and will look at a few business cases that demonstrate a failure to meet standards of responsibility.

Corporate governance and social responsibility are two issues, which are dominating the agendas of 21st century multinationals. Both of these propositions provide multinationals with the opportunity to integrate their values into the way they do business and differentiate themselves from their competitors. This paper aims to describe and analyse the corporate governance and social responsibility initiatives of Samsung with a particular focus on Samsung Electronics. Firstly, an introduction to Samsung and its activities is provided. Then an analysis on how the company deals with business ethics is provided. Next, an overview of its corporate governance and social responsibility

Companies with extensive responsibilities even argue about the system in pursuing social responsibility of business. According to Ulrich Steger, the company should prioritize the shareholders’ incessant interest but they should also be concerned of their social responsibilities, morals and environmental goals that the public expects them to be. Without a doubt, companies’ primary goal is to earn a profit. Emphasizing on profitability affects the fundamental values in the company, its morality. Companies ignore the ethics just to earn a mountainous income. This often causes extensive repercussions in the companies.