1.0 INTRODUCTION
Corporations the world over have been publicly criticized for improving their firm’s bottom line at any moral or social cost. Ethics essentially “refers to the issues of right, wrong, fairness and justice.” Clearly, examples such as Enron, WorldCom, and even Conrad Black tested society’s views on sound ethical business and the link to what society sees as “good” governance practices. Although the controversies involve issues matched in variety only by the types of companies, they all virtually involve some form of abuse of stakeholders trust. These cases are not representative of the entire spectrum of today’s business environment; in fact, there are a number of companies whose competitive advantages are based on
…show more content…
The use of these groups defined as “teams of workers without a formal, company-appointed supervisor who decided among themselves matters traditionally handled by a supervisor.” The use of these management techniques not only fosters innovation, but improves the quality of products as well. Once this structure is combined with the “set of organised, well integrated, and continuous activities involving both managers and workers” that defines Toyota’s “Total Quality Management System,” the result is consistent recognition of vehicles with the highest initial quality by various rating associations.
2.2 Suppliers
Toyota’s approach extends beyond treating employees with respect, but also looks to develop “an atmosphere of long-term trust and of a partnership based on mutual prosperity” with its suppliers, demonstrating their commitment to Total Quality Management. This commitment is partially attributable to the Japanese business practice of clients and suppliers purchasing equity positions within their respective companies, however this practice is neither the sole, nor the primary cause of this approach. More accurately,
It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the
It's difficult not to be cynical about how “big business” treats the subject of ethics in today's world. In many corporations, where the
What is ethically responsible management? How can a corporation, given its economic mission, be managed with appropriate attention to ethical concerns? These are central questions in the field of business ethics. There are two approaches to answering such questions. The first one is Milton Friedman’s shareholder theory of management and the second one is Edwards Freeman’s “Stakeholder” theory of management, two different views about the purpose and aims of a business.
It is easy to understand Solomon’s argument that unethical practices destroy the business and its key people. This has been proven by so many companies, such as Enron case, whose scandals have been unveiled to the public and the people who used to amass great wealth out of unethical practices are now behind bars. Even if they get out of prison, it will be difficult to imagine how they can recover from the negative image that the public already has on them.
In today’s 21st century, it takes good ethics for every company to strive competitively to maintain as the best top competitor in their industries; and has its provocations of smart goal as to how successfully they anticipate their business to function, when it comes to finances, attracting and recruiting employees, begin an admirable corporation to citizens, and while showing customers and employees love, courteous, and appreciation. Companies forestall unethical behavior of bad reputation to uphold the organization values. These atrocious speculations can permanently cause decreased revenues and will degrade the company name, sometimes irreparably damaged.
Toyota was thought to be the best quality car in the 1970s and 1980s but, due to Japanese competition, American car manufactures soon began to close the rankings gap. At the top of their game in 2010, Toyota had to stop manufacturing and order a large recall of automobiles. While leadership was probably considered great at the height of Toyota’s success, changes were obviously needed during the recall period and management needed to be as adaptable to those changing conditions. The only thing regarded as permanent in a market economy is change
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.
Business ethics since the beginning of this decade has been slowly eroding; if we are to believe what we see and hear in the media. Several times a day, one can view some derogatory piece of information concerning a business. However, it must also be considered that these companies are contributing to that stigma. There have been a variety of companies and individuals who have figured prominently in the media concerning their unethical behavior.
Enron was named the most admired company for six years in a row, and it was widely considered one of the best companies to work for by Fortune magazine. Enron shocked the world, and it's stockholders when it was revealed at the end of 2001 that the company’s “reported financial condition was sustained substantially by institutionalized, systematic, and creatively planned accounting fraud”. (Enron, 2011, para. 1) Enron maximized it’s long-run profits for itself, but not within the limits of the law. Enron disregarded it’s social responsibility to it’s stackholders when the company only strive for it’s maximized profits, and didn’t strive
Enron’s ride is quite a phenomenon: from a regional gas pipeline trader to the largest energy trader in the world, and then back down the hill into bankruptcy and disgrace. As a matter of fact, it took Enron 16 years to go from about $10 billion of assets to $65 billion of assets, and 24 days to go bankruptcy. Enron is also one of the most celebrated business ethics cases in the century. There are so many things that went wrong within the organization, from all personal (prescriptive and psychological approaches), managerial (group norms, reward system, etc.), and organizational (world-class culture) perspectives. This paper will focus on the business ethics issues at Enron that were raised from the documentation Enron: The Smartest Guys
(Panza & Potthast, n.d.) Ethics is very important to a company’s success. Ethical behavior can bring benefits to a business. They can attract customers, which can lead to a boost in sales and profits. It can attract the right employees and increase productivity. It can also attract investors and keep the company’s share price high. Unethical behavior on the other hand can damage a company’s reputation and make it less appealing to stakeholders. It could also result in lower profits.
Business Industry has witnessed the outcomes of bad moral decisions taken by business leaders. Enron’s story is only one example of corporate scandals and cases of bad moral decisions, which has not only shaken the public trust in corporations, but also affected the bank accounts of investors and employees. Before the bankruptcy of Enron; it was included in one of the fortune 500 companies after its fraudulent accounting case the share went down to $1 (Enron scandal, 2010; PBS, 2002; Godwin, 2006; Godwin, 2008).
One factor that adds to the success of Toyota’s supply chain is their relationship with their suppliers and how they do business with those suppliers. Toyota does not simply give their supply contracts to the highest bidder; instead they work incredibly closely with their suppliers so that they can get the highest quality products possible. Toyota uses long-term, just-in-time contracts with all of their suppliers (Winfield & Hay, 1997). Toyota does not engage in any kind of mutual contracts, such as buy-back or revenue-sharing; however, they do take multiple steps to ensure a mutual benefit when they pair up with a supplier. Toyota invests in their suppliers to help them develop products (Liker & Choi, 2004). They also ensure that they share information with their suppliers in a structured fashion. They believe that targeted information leads to results and they ensure that specific communication is relayed to their suppliers at set times and in set ways (Liker & Choi, 2004). Perhaps the most unique aspect of Toyota’s relationships with their suppliers is that they embark on joint improvement ventures together. They set up study groups with suppliers to help both parties learn how to improve operations and send executives and engineers to the supply plants to help them improve processes (Liker & Choi, 2004). These kinds of benefits are described in the contracts Toyota keeps with their suppliers (Toyota Supplier, 2011). The close relationships that
The overwhelming facts point to a shady underworld of self-dealing and opportunistic exploitation of the poor and working class, which was until recently, well hidden from the commoner. The executives of WorldCom and Enron provide real world examples of unethical business practices, where the desire to make money for their shareholders transcended into an addiction to greed and self-dealing that were displayed by their, “excessive pay, perks, and golden parachutes”(Carson 392) at the expense of all stakeholders. All is not lost, there are corporations that pride themselves in their sound business model and commitment to ethical business practices. Such companies as Eaton Corporation, and Weyerhaeuser, who according to Ethisphere.com, a business ethics watchdog, are among the “2010 World`s most ethical companies.” (Ethisphere)
Unfortunately, scandals like Enron are not isolated incidents and the last decade has offered Americans a disheartening perspective with comparable scandals like that of WorldCom and Tyco, Sunbeam, Global Crossing and many more. Companies have a concrete responsibility not just to their investors but to society as a whole to have practices which deter corporate greed and looting and which actively and effectively work to prevent such things from happening. This