Assignment 07en130 English Composition II Directions

Assignment 07en130 English Composition Iidirectionsbe Sure To Save An

Directions: Be sure to save an electronic copy of your answer before submitting it to Ashworth College for grading. Unless otherwise stated, answer in complete sentences, and be sure to use correct English, spelling, and grammar. Sources must be cited in APA format. Your response should be a minimum of two (2) double-spaced pages to a maximum of three (3) pages in length; refer to the "Assignment Format" page located on the Course Home page for specific format requirements. Using what you’ve learned throughout this course, but especially in Lesson 7, write a well-developed argument essay on one of the following topics:

  • Do corporations have a social responsibility beyond just obeying the law?
  • Privatization of government services
  • Minimum wage
  • National Healthcare
  • Workplace electronic surveillance and privacy issues
  • Distance education or traditional education
  • Internet privacy
  • PC or Mac
  • Should there be an Internet sales tax?

You may use outside sources if you document them using APA format, or you may write this essay based entirely on your knowledge/experience. This is the end of Lesson 07.

Paper For Above instruction

In contemporary society, the role of corporations extends beyond mere compliance with legal statutes; it involves a broader sense of social responsibility that impacts communities, the environment, and global society. This essay explores whether corporations should be accountable for social responsibilities beyond the legal obligations they currently abide by, emphasizing the importance of ethical practices, stakeholder interests, and sustainable development.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has evolved as a crucial aspect of modern business strategies. While obeying the law is fundamental, companies are increasingly expected to take proactive steps towards ethical conduct. For instance, many corporations voluntarily adopt environmentally sustainable practices, support charitable initiatives, and implement fair labor policies that exceed legal requirements. This shift signifies recognition that businesses operate within complex social systems and have a duty to contribute positively to society.

One compelling argument for corporate social responsibility beyond legality concerns ethical imperatives and the long-term sustainability of both businesses and society. Ethical practices foster consumer trust and loyalty, which translate into economic benefits for companies. For example, Patagonia's commitment to environmental sustainability has boosted its brand reputation and customer base. Conversely, neglecting social responsibilities can lead to reputational damage, consumer boycotts, and financial losses, as seen in cases of environmental disasters or labor abuses.

Moreover, corporate social responsibility aligns with stakeholder theory, which emphasizes that companies have responsibilities not only to shareholders but also to employees, customers, suppliers, communities, and the environment. By addressing these diverse interests, corporations can mitigate risks, enhance their social license to operate, and contribute to societal well-being. For instance, Google’s investments in renewable energy demonstrate recognition of the broader impact of their operations on global climate health.

However, critics argue that the primary purpose of a business is profit maximization for shareholders, and social responsibilities can distract from economic efficiency. Nonetheless, numerous studies suggest that integrating CSR with core business strategies can create synergistic benefits, including improved financial performance and competitive advantage. Companies like Unilever have demonstrated that sustainability initiatives can drive innovation and open new markets, proving that social responsibility and profitability can coexist.

In conclusion, while obeying the law is essential, corporations should embrace a broader social responsibility that extends into ethical practices, environmental stewardship, and community engagement. Doing so not only benefits society but also enhances the long-term success and resilience of businesses. As stakeholders increasingly demand responsible conduct, companies that proactively integrate social considerations into their strategies will likely enjoy sustained growth and reputation in an interconnected world.

References

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.
  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M.. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.
  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D.. (2001). Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127.
  • Smith, N. C. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: Not whether, but how? Harvard Business Review, 81(12), 82–89.
  • Bhattacharya, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening stakeholder–company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 257–272.
  • McIntosh, M., & Oswick, C. (2014). Critical perspectives on corporate social responsibility. In C. S. M. Grayson & D. R. Leith (Eds.), Understanding social responsibility (pp. 45–64). Routledge.
  • Porter, M. E., & Van der Linde, C. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97–118.
  • Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Brookings Institution Press.
  • Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, with implications for corporate performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507–525.
  • Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society: A relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 99–115.

Related Assignments