Milton Friedman's View On Business Responsibility

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

The purpose of this essay is to research the notion of CSR and uncover its true framework and outline what social responsibility truly means to corporate organisations, and whether it should be seriously considered to be a legitimate addition to the corporate framework of an organisation.

How does Milton Friedman present the common understanding of socially responsible acts on the part of business?

Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to enhance its profits. The New York Times Magazine.

Based on my interpretation of CSR, I see it as a voluntary obligation that companies have promised to their stakeholders to fulfill by improving, or at least not harm, the environmental and social wellbeing. When companies engage in CSR, they voluntarily promise to, for example, carry the responsibility to protect the environment and take actions against bribe or other corruptive activities related to their business. It certainly has some positive influences to specific areas based on my knowledge gained from other classes; nevertheless, when judge CSR in the context of total impacts on our society and environment, it is obvious that CSR has failed its mission to lessen the negative impacts of business based on the evidences that provided by the author. Also, since there is a strong positive relationship between CSR behaviors and consumers’ reactions to a firm’s products and services, it seems to me, now, that CSR for the most companies is just a fancy cover that helps them to create or promote a good image and reputation. The recent case that shows the failure of CSR of Volkswagen even make me believe that CSR programs may be just a marketing or public relation exercise for many

The prevalent view of business’ social responsibility is Milton Friedman’s agent-owner theory. His thesis mainly says that“ There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage

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

Nevertheless, Friedman pointed out that the profits has taken the firms in to the hand of business intellectuals by which Friedman recommend that the financial system by which the organisation run its business is in the restricted responsibility protection which makes the organisations to privatise their profits (Friedman 1970 pp. 177-184). Friedman also suggested that according to him the shareholder theory in terms of socially responsible can only increase the profit. But on the other hand shareholder theory of Edward Freeman completely support the theory of shareholder towards its role to be socially responsible in the society and maximising the profits for the benefits of shareholders within the firms and society as well (Freeman 2008 pp. 162-165).

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.

Is the deception of consumers worth making a profit? The Ford Pinto, popular car of the 1970s, made a profit off of a vehicle that endangered the lives of hundreds of people. In his essay “Pinto Madness” Mark Dowie, author and Pulitzer Prize nominee, exposed the unethical decisions made by Ford Motor Company. When it came to their customer’s safety and profit for the company, Ford made a decision that led to consequences their customers had to pay the price for. Should the business be held accountable for these actions? In his essay “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profit” Milton Friedman, powerful economist, discusses what a business should prioritize in the economic system. Friedman declares what a business is responsible for and the guidelines they must follow. Due to Friedman’s view, he would not have condoned the actions and decisions that the executives at Ford Motor Company took.

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