Friedman's Views Against Business Ethics

Milton Friedman’s shareholder theory of management says that the purpose of a business is to make money for the owner or the stockholders of the business. Friedman says that there is only one social responsibility for the business: to use its resources in order to increase

First thing let us start with a little overview of what Milton Friedman exposed in his article. It seems that the whole point of his essay revolves around one basic statement which clearly says that the only social responsibility of business is to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long it stays within the rules of the game (Milton Friedman, the social responsibility of business is to increase profit).

What Friedman implies is that shareholders should only be concerned with maximizing profits and not be obligated to be “socially responsible.” In that case, the manager would only have one priority, to maximize profits. However, what if that manager determined that social endeavors is the best option to maximize profits? This would make the corporation socially responsible while still maintaining maximum profits. The argument presented by Friedman in this case is that while the manager is performing as expected by maximizing profits, this type of “social responsibility is frequently a cloak for actions that are justified on other grounds rather than a reason for those actions.”

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

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.

Subsequently, Denning may have misinterpreted Friedman’s main argument. The actual title of Friedman's article is "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits". Denning hastily substituted the word "sole" for "social" and misinterpreted Friedman’s argument to be that that the sole purpose of the firm is to make money for shareholders. This is not true. The main issue Friedman was tackling was the social responsibility of business; the responsibility that it has to the society. In fact, the word “sole” was not mentioned even once in the

* will not be faced with any sort of ethical dilemmas and conflict of interest

Milton Friedman argues that persons may choose to undertake social responsibilities to their communities, churches, or nations, and devote their own incomes to causes that they deem morally worthy. But, he adds, if corporate executives attempt to take such social responsibilities or to direct the corporation’s profits to such personal causes, without approval from the shareholders, then:

a. Milton Friedman’s philosophy of corporate responsibility is that “social matters are not the concern of business people and that these problems should be resolved by the unfettered workings of the free market system”. As harsh as it may sound, what he mean course to say was that a business has “to make as much money as possible while conforming to basic rules of society”. Meanwhile, Archie Carroll’s philosophy states that a business has “four kinds of social responsibilities” that a firm must address in their corporate social responsibility, which are economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic duties. Clearly they have two very different views. Friedman sees that a business’s ultimate goal is to generate profits, then comes the legal and ethical responsibilities it must fulfill. To Friedman, there is no need to be philanthropic because the firm’s job is only to make money for the economy, and it is the economy’s obligation to be philanthropic with the profits. Carroll agrees with Friedman that a company must be profitable, then be legal by obeying the law, and be ethical to avoid harm. However, Carroll believes it is also desired and in the best interests of the company to be philanthropic because it will “create a good corporate citizen”. Friedman has an economic view whereas Carroll has a social view. In my opinion, Archie Carroll’s philosophy on corporate social responsibility is more accurate. The social pyramid model he made to go with his views makes

Milton Friedman wrote in his famous 1970’s article in The New York Times Magazine, that “the one and only social responsibility of business, is to increase profits for shareholders.” Milton Friedman's view on business responsibility accentuates the importance of maximizing firm's value. He pointed that the “there is one and only one social responsibility of business –to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engaged in open and free completion without deception or fraud’’ and by taking on the burden of social cost, the business becomes less efficient (Milton Friedman, 1962).

Do you agree or disagree with the following quotation: “There is one and only one social responsibility of business—to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say engages in free and open competition, without deception and fraud.” Milton Friedman, a Nobel Prize winning economist. In other words, the social responsibility of business is to make a profit.

Milton Friedman was an American economist, statistician and writer, who had a massive impact on the research agenda of the economics profession. His famous words “the only responsibility of business is to increase its profits” (Friedman, Milton. 1970) led to many controversial debates on whether businesses should have ethics or if profit should be their main goal. Corporate social responsibility has many definitions, as its interpretation is quite loose, so I have chosen one that relates the most to this essay, given by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, in 2000: “Corporate social

Question 1: In the 1960s, Milton Friedman said that the purpose of business was to increase shareholder return and that issues of ethics were not the concern of any business – the law should be complied with, morality should be strived for, but ethical consideration had no place in the business environment.

Friedman argues that the only responsibility a business has to society is to act in its own self-interest to create revenue and remain successful in the economic system (158).Created to make a profit by providing a task or service, a business must “use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits” (Friedman 164). A business could use any tactic to gain a profit as long as they remained “within the rules of the game” (Friedman 164). The rules implied that no deception or fraud could take place while the corporation obtained their profit.

For a long time now, there has been much debate over the social responsibility of a business. Friedman is one of the most influential