Assignment 3: Ethics And Corporate Responsibility In 759382

Assignment 3ethics And Corporate Responsibility In The Workplace And

Describe the key characteristics of a stakeholder and determine all the stakeholders within the PharmaCARE scenario. Analyze the human rights issues presented by PharmaCARE’s treatment of the Colberia’s indigenous population versus that of its executives. Recommend at least three (3) changes PharmaCARE can make to be more ethical going forward. Assess PharmaCARE’s environmental initiative against the backdrop of its anti-environmental lobbying efforts and Colberian activities. Support the position. Decide whether or not PharmaCARE’s actions with respect to the indigenous people of Colberia would be ethical in accordance with each of the following ethical theories: a. Utilitarianism b. Deontology c. Virtue ethics d. Ethics of care e. Your own moral / ethical compass. Compare PharmaCARE’s actions with those of at least one (1) real-world company, whose corporate activities led to ethical, environmental, or workplace safety issues and financial loss. Analyze the similarities and differences between PharmaCARE and the company that you chose. Use at least three (3) quality resources in this assignment.

Paper For Above instruction

PharmaCARE exemplifies a multinational corporation with complex stakeholder relationships, involving a wide spectrum of parties affected by its operations. Stakeholders in this scenario include the company itself, its employees and executives, the indigenous population of Colberia, local communities, environmental groups, governmental agencies, shareholders, and consumers. Each stakeholder group bears different interests and responsibilities concerning PharmaCARE’s business activities.

Stakeholder Characteristics in the PharmaCARE Scenario

Stakeholders are individuals or groups affected by or capable of influencing a company's actions. They possess specific characteristics: interest alignment, influence capacity, and level of impact. For PharmaCARE, the indigenous population of Colberia is a primary stakeholder harmed by habitat destruction and labor practices. Shareholders and executives influence company policies but may have conflicting interests—profit maximization versus ethical responsibility. Local communities, environmental groups, and regulatory agencies serve as external stakeholders shaping and being affected by corporate decisions.

Human Rights Issues: Indigenous Population vs. Executives

The treatment of Colberian indigenous peoples by PharmaCARE raises significant human rights concerns. Indigenous communities suffer from environmental degradation, loss of habitat, and exploitation in labor practices, reflecting violations of their rights to health, cultural integrity, and environmental protection. Conversely, PharmaCARE’s executives enjoy luxury and comfort, exemplifying stark economic inequality and potential neglect of social responsibility. The disparity underscores issues of exploitation and ethical neglect, where vulnerable populations are disenfranchised and harmed for corporate gain.

Recommendations for Ethical Improvements

1. Implement Fair Labor Practices: PharmaCARE should ensure equitable wages, safe working conditions, and respect for local cultures and traditions, aligning its operations with international labor standards.
2. Enhance Environmental Stewardship: The company must adhere to its environmental commitments genuinely by ceasing habitat destruction, protecting native species, and engaging in sustainable practices that benefit local ecosystems.
3. Engage in Ethical Stakeholder Dialogue: Establish transparent communication channels with Colberian communities, indigenous leaders, and environmental groups to incorporate their voices into decision-making processes and ensure mutual respect.

Environmental Initiatives vs. Lobbying Efforts

PharmaCARE’s “We CARE about YOUR world®” program professes environmental responsibility through recycling and green initiatives. However, its lobbying efforts oppose stringent environmental laws, such as those related to the Superfund tax, demonstrating a conflicting stance between corporate branding and actual practices. This dichotomy reveals superficial engagement with sustainability, undermining credibility and raising concerns about corporate integrity. Genuine environmental responsibility requires consistent actions aligned with public commitments rather than strategic lobbying that weakens environmental protections.

Ethical Analysis: Actions Toward Colberia’s Indigenous People

a. Utilitarianism

Utilitarian ethics evaluate actions based on overall happiness or suffering. PharmaCARE’s exploitation of Colberia’s environment and people causes significant harm, including habitat destruction and social disenfranchisement, outweighing any benefits such as medical provision or economic activity. Thus, their actions are unethical from a utilitarian perspective because they increase suffering and reduce overall well-being.

b. Deontology

Deontological ethics emphasize duties and moral principles. PharmaCARE appears to violate duties of respect, justice, and non-maleficence toward indigenous communities, given their exploitation and environmental harm. Therefore, their actions are inherently unethical according to deontological standards, which demand adherence to moral laws regardless of outcomes.

c. Virtue Ethics

Virtue ethics focus on moral character and virtues such as compassion, justice, and integrity. PharmaCARE’s neglect of indigenous welfare and environmental sustainability reflects a lack of virtuous qualities. Their behavior demonstrates greed and indifference, indicating an unethical character from this moral framework.

d. Ethics of Care

Ethics of care stresses compassion and relational responsibilities. PharmaCARE fails in this regard by disregarding the needs and rights of the Colberian people and environment, prioritizing profit over wellbeing. This negligence contravenes the ethic of care’s emphasis on nurturing and responsibility toward vulnerable populations.

e. Personal Moral/Ethical Compass

Personally, ethical corporate conduct involves respecting human rights, promoting sustainability, and acting transparently. PharmaCARE’s actions conflict with these principles, highlighting the need for a paradigm shift toward more compassionate and responsible management that considers long-term societal impacts.

Comparison with a Real-World Company

One relevant comparison is Nike, Inc., which faced criticism for labor violations and poor working conditions in its supply chains. Similarities include exploitation of vulnerable workers and superficial corporate social responsibility efforts. Differences lie in the scope and outcomes: Nike has since made strides in sustainability and labor reforms, whereas PharmaCARE’s actions remain ethically contentious. Both cases demonstrate the importance of aligning corporate practices with ethical standards to prevent reputational damage and social harm.

Conclusion

PharmaCARE’s scenario highlights the critical need for ethical reform in global corporate practices. Emphasizing stakeholder responsibility, respecting human rights, engaging in genuine environmental stewardship, and aligning actions with ethical theories can foster a more responsible and sustainable business model. Companies must recognize their moral obligations beyond profit to ensure their operations benefit society minimally as much as they profit economically.

References

• Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford University Press.
• Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Cambridge University Press.
• Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
• Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. The New York Times Magazine.
• Birchall, J. (2018). Ethics and Stakeholder Management. Routledge.
• Hoffman, A. J. (2018). Creating a Sustainability Advantage. Stanford University Press.
• Jamali, D. (2010). A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective into Theory and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 1-10.
• Schultz, M., & Poutziouris, P. (2018). Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics. Emerald Publishing.
• Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). Superfund Overview. EPA.gov.
• Winston, W. L. (2014). Corporate Environmental Responsibility and Business Sustainability: Corporate Habits and Strategies. Business & Society, 53(4), 451-481.