Not All Companies Are Viewed As Equal - Essay Sample

Introduction

In the public perception, not all companies are taken to be equal. Some companies are treated with admiration while others with contempt; depending on the kind of products they deal in and the effects of such products on human health. It is justified to some industries to have an unfavorable image in the eyes of the public if their sole motivation is to profiteer without consideration for public interests. I do not believe that some companies are unfairly targeted in the world of free trade, primarily because all the companies that file their tax returns carefully embrace environmental-friendly production and perform their corporate social responsibility duties usually do not complain of witch-hunt.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

It is an issue of great ethical concern even to imagine that the public should be left with the choice to decide whether to partake in products that could compromise their health. The companies that deal with these products should take the initiative to protect the public from the harmful effects associated with the products that they produce (Sun, 2015). Most of the products that have adverse effects on the users also have an addictive effect, thereby prompting fad consumption of the products from the public. For example, the excessive calorie beverages like the Cola drinks and fatty foods burgers are the chief causes of obesity amongst Americans; but the obese people are already addicted to the products and have a tough time regulating their intake of the same products. The same happens with alcohol, cigarettes, tobacco companies and others. Therefore, it should be the prerogative of the companies involved to work on protecting public health.

Capitalism has an overarching influence on corporate decision-making. The motivation to make huge profits is superior to any other goal. The desire to use minimum resource inputs in anticipation for maximum resource outputs puts most corporations on dilemma when it comes to complying with their ethical and corporate social responsibilities (McMahon, 2013). The call for capitalism does not permit corporations to incur losses or make minimal profits in any business atmosphere. The decision-making in corporate corridors is the prerogative of the boards of directors whose primary objective is to make the highest achievable levels of profits in the fiercely competitive business environments.

While it is not easy to achieve, it is equally not impossible that a responsible company can take care of its profit interests and that of the public without conflict. The companies willing to achieve this goal must know how and when to cap its capitalistic tendencies such that the inspiration to maximize profits does not eclipse the ethical and corporate social responsibilities (Hubbard, 2016). Part of achieving the goal begins with budgeting and realigning the organizational culture to set new moral and economic strategies. A company that is working in compliance with their legal responsibilities usually finds a way to address the two obligations of profit-making and ethical obedience. Utilitarianism dictates that something, like profit in business, is only moral if its goodness can affect people positively and translate into benefits for a significant number of people (Arntzenius, 2014). Every company should, therefore, make profits in a considerate manner.

Conclusion

All corporations must understand that the public is susceptible to the marketing, advertisement and promotion strategies. The brainwashing that comes with product marketing does not give the public an opportunity to interrogate the suitability of the product they are consuming; worse of all the harmful products are generally addictive. The ethical and corporate social responsibilities of corporations remain a primary obligation that must be fulfilled and should therefore not be masked by the capitalism that permeates corporate practices today.

References

Arntzenius, F. (2014). UTILITARIANISM, DECISION THEORY AND ETERNITY. Philosophical Perspectives, 28(1), 31-58. doi:10.1111/phpe.12036

Hubbard, K. (2016). Can Businesses Pursue both Ethics and Profits? | Saint Anselm College. Retrieved from https://www.anselm.edu/ethics-governance/blog/can-businesses-pursue-both-ethics-and-profits

McMahon, C. (2013). Public capitalism: The political authority of corporate executives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press

Sun, H. (2015). The Ethical Responsibilities of Luxury Companies and Consumers. The Luxury Economy and Intellectual Property, 225-248. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199335701.003.0011