The Shareholder Approach For Managerial Responsibility Essay

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

In this essay we are taking a look at the famous Milton Friedman's essay "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profit ". The following paper is an attempt to critically evaluate the article in consideration of Freeman Stakeholder Theory.

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.

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

Over the years, firms have increasingly been maximising shareholder value. However, Steve Denning, a former director of the World Bank, author of six leadership and management books and columnist for Forbes, disagrees. His article “The Origin of the ‘World’s Dumbest Idea’: Milton Friedman”, was published on June 26, 2013 on Forbes, debates against Friedman’s argument that the social responsibility of corporations is to make money for its shareholders. The main issue here is whether the maximisation of shareholder value as the guiding principle of executives is detrimental to the corporation. Although Denning has exhibited valid points in his argument, his lack of citation, biased view on most arguments and his tone has dampened the credibility

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.

Milton Friedman continues with Smith’s line of logic as he asserts that the chief concern of the businessman must be to make a profit under socially acceptable means and that the defining of “social responsibilities” must be left in the political sphere. Celgene’s chief executive, John Jackson, was the primary force behind the company’s decision to raise prices. Jackson’s actions are perfectly ethical according to Friedman who writes, “What does it mean to say that the corporate executive has a “social responsibility” in his capacity as a businessman? If this statement is not pure rhetoric, it must mean that he is to act in some way that is not in the interest of

Corporations can be large or small but they all have some sort of ethical impact on their employees, shareholders, customers, community, and surrounding environments. Richard DeGeorge writes, “We can speak of corporations having moral responsibilities to act in certain ways, and they are morally responsible for the consequences of their actions on people.” (p. 200). Large corporations are comprised of the board of directors, management, and their workers. They also deal with suppliers, customers, and have competitors. This essay will examine the moral responsibilities within a corporation.

The need for clarification on the board requirements for a majority of independent directors as it relates to corporate governance is of great importance and would be discussed in this write up.

This was a very interesting article, in my opinion it brings to mind the derived phrase, which came first the chicken or the egg. Meaning, is corporate governance an attempt to control the results of unethical practices of corporations or is it meant to deter them. In reading this article, it is clear that certain corporations practiced unethical business behaviors for self-interest, but the questions this author have are: 1. Should corporate governance be regulated by the legislature as well as the organization and to what degree, 2. Is corporate governance, there to protect the shareholder or the stakeholder, 3. How effective is corporate governance on a global level. The need for a governance system is based on the assumption that the separation between the owners of a company and its management provides self-interest executives the opportunity to take actions that benefit themselves, with the cost of these actions borne by the owners (Larcker & Tayan, 2008).

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

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 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).

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

Milton Friedman wrote in 1973 that managements “primary responsibility is to the shareholders who own and invest in the company”. What are the consequences of this philosophy for HRM ethics, and what alternative perspectives might serve the profession in the future?