Corporate Social Responsibility Of Unilever And Procter & Gamble Essay

Many firms are learning that being environmentally friendly and sustainable has numerous benefits. (O.C Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell, 2015). This could enable them to increase goodwill from various stakeholders and also save money in the long term. This will mean that they are being more efficient and less wasteful of resources, which will enable them to be more competitive by satisfying stakeholders. The CEO of

Unilever believes in the sustainable growth and use of renewable sources of energy. It is also very watchful of employee health and has managed to bring down its accidental rate by a high margin. Unilever’s vision includes a better way for living for its consumers and better use of the products that they use. It maintains a high standard of its products by following stringent standards which helps in maintaining consumer satisfaction. Over the years, after working for different social projects like Water conservation and Food for all, it has grown its image as a socially aware and responsible

Kroger’s CSR efforts regarding environmental efforts are more robust than employee stakeholder support. Even with this, Kroger is considered a laggard with environmental CSR standards when compared to Walmart and Target (van der Ven, 2014). A main reason for this could be due to Kroger’s relatively light involvement with CSR focused organizations. Their leadership may simply not be exposed to CSR ideas as much as their peers (van der Ven, 2014). Expanding CSR knowledge, and leadership widening their network on CSR possibilities will give Kroger’s leaders access to industry leaders best practice knowledge.

One company that engages highly in Corporate Social Responsibility is Burt’s bees. This company is a part of the Natural Products Association and developed the Natural Standard for Personal Care Products, which set in motion guidelines for what determines whether or not a product is considered all natural. In producing solely natural products this company is dedicated to the sustainability of the environment and the health of their consumers. Each product design is promised to be organic and environmental friendly in order to benefit consumers as well as the ecosystem with which we live in and must maintain. The company has enacted a goal for 2020 to be the “greenest personal care company on earth.” With this goal in mind they aim to be carbon free and operate using 100 percent renewable energy, ultimately emitting no waste into the environment. They intend to provide employees with educational and motivational inspiration on how to be and promote sustainability to other members of society as well as promote sustainability efforts to society through social media

Therefore, it is unethical for businesses to refuse this opportunity. An article titled “Large And Dirty' Companies Adopting Greener Strategies To Earn More Green”, published by ScienceDaily, offers a look at a development in corporate policies. In the article, a professor at the Johns Hopkins Carey Business School in Baltimore named Phillip H. Phan presents a new trend in business strategies. When referring to formerly wasteful companies, Phan states, “Now they view concern for the environment as an opportunity to embed innovations that save production costs in the long term and that also improve their standing as good corporate citizens in the public mind” (qtd. in “Large And Dirty'” 1). Phan is insisting that many companies are now adopting environmentally friendly policies. Most see these strategies as an advantage in the end. In turn, the economy continues to grow while corporations maintain conservation. The question remains, why implement environmental regulations? As the evidence has shown, more businesses have begun to use environmentally friendly policies. While this is a positive change, other companies have yet to embrace these strategies. For this reason, the point is not to drive a stake between conservation and business but to find mutual benefits. Above all, governments must set better standards based on the

What are the similarities and differences between both companies regarding their corporate social responsibility efforts?

Corporate social responsibility can simply be identified as a duty, which is not a legal obligation lately, under very much consideration by every multinationals, as well as the growing firm. The ongoing concern is meant to increase the awareness between the business Individuals, to implement and draw line which should clearly indicates that what social obligation an organization has towards the society.(Caroll,1970) (Caroll, Archie, B.(1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility is towards the moral management of organization stakeholder.

In this case BP PLC is another multi-national name brand corporation that operates under three different segments: “Exploration and Production; Refining and Marketing; and Gas, Power, and Renewables” (Jennings, 2012, 411), They used “green” and “socially responsible” in its marketing

Nestle is one of the largest food and beverage company in the world. Nearly every of the world have the manufacturing facility of Nestle. Nestle can referred to the most multinational of the multinationals. Nestlé markets approximately 7,500 brands and in can organize into the few categories such as baby food, medical food, bottled water, breakfast cereals, coffee and tea, confectionery, dairy products, ice cream, frozen food, pet foods, and snacks. (Nestlé S.A., n.d.)

The following paper explores environmentally friendly strategies utilized in the UK based multi-million-dollar corporation, Marks and Spencer. Marks and Spencer is a food and retail corporation, with headquarters in London, England. The following paper will analyze the effectiveness of utilizing environmentally friendly strategies in a large corporation, such as M&S, and how those strategies could be implemented in a US based startup food and retail business, specifically located in central Florida.

Walmart is taking jobs out of America to other countries like china, where greater parts of their products are manufactured. This is not being socially responsibly to the community. Walmart again pays its employees low wages. The company do not care about the employees welfare, the fact that you need a job means you are in need and they treat you any how they want. There are so many questions that need to be answered. Walmart taking out life insurance policy on terminal ill employees while making millions in profit from customers. Walmart put small businesses out of business and the charge double what they were charging because there is no other choice. Is it ok to do all these wrong and donate to the society and charity and portray to the world that you are a good company.

Can a company be profitable and environmentally friendly? More companies are reporting profitability from environmentally friendly practices. When one thinks of environmentally friendly businesses, some companies come immediately to mind; Whole Foods, Annie’s, Seventh Generation, and Method, for example, are all known for their commitment to being green. However, there are other firms putting a lot of resources into planet-helping initiatives, companies whose green tactics are far less recognized, and may even come as a surprise to you. I will provide the research that I found about which companies are environmentally-friendly and how these companies are changing the standards of how energy and water can be used efficiently.

Examine Apple’s current position on the company’s ethical and social responsibilities, and determine whether or not the company has met these responsibilities. Provide two (2) examples that support your position.

“A Coke is a Coke, and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same, and all the Cokes are good. Liz Taylor knows it, the President knows it, the bum knows it, and you know it."(Andy Warhol, 1975) Regardless of its corporate reputation, the organizational performance and its social responsibility of Coca-Cola makes it loved around the world. Ever since its creation in 1886 Coca-Cola has been a household brand known globally for generations of families. I have to mention, of all the cases researched this is my least favorite not only because of my childhood love for the product because the ethical issues in one way or another always manage to resolve themselves not before further tainting the reputation Coke worked so hard to obtain. Most times, whether an organization is innocent of an unethical act, it becomes secondary to the suspicion of the original act. Almost as if the court of public opinion has the power to ruin the reputation of an organization based on an unfounded accusation. In spite of my loyalty after having ready the case, I do believe Coca-Cola to be flawed. The contamination scare in Belgium is a great example of a public relations nightmare. The slightest hint of impurity should have pushed Coca Cola into crisis management mode but they were slow to react, citing it a minor issue (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, (2011). It was not until local officials

With the spread of social marketing and CSR in the world, organizations tend to not only consider the consumers’ demands and the companies’ profit, but also take the consumers’ and societies’ long-term benefit into account. Hildebrand,D,et,al (2011) demonstrated that the CSR activities can make up the central, special and core characteristics of the company identity, the identification of the corporate can also be aroused due to CSR activities. Moreover, Porter and Kramer (2006) highlighted that CSR can aid companies create the ability to achieve corporate resource so as to build a sustainable and defensible competitive position. So the companies should consciously undertake corporate social responsibility.