Choose A Positive Example From The Past Ten Years Of Busines

Choose a positive example from the past ten years of a business organization

Analyze and describe the ethical decision-making and actions in the organization, including an explanation of the ethical framework applied by the organization to make its decision, supported by scholarly research. Examine both the positive and negative consequences of the decision, including the tradeoffs that leadership made in making their decision. The analysis should be four pages long (excluding cover page and references), and include at least five peer-reviewed references.

Paper For Above instruction

In recent years, many organizations have demonstrated exemplary ethical decision-making that underscores their commitment to integrity, social responsibility, and long-term sustainability. One notable example is the leadership of Starbucks Corporation during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly their strategic decision to prioritize employee and customer safety over immediate financial gains. This case illustrates how a corporation can navigate ethical dilemmas by adhering to a well-defined ethical framework, resulting in both positive reputation gains and some short-term challenges.

Starbucks, a global coffeehouse chain, faced unprecedented challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapidly evolving health crisis posed significant risks to employees and customers, forcing the company to reevaluate its operational priorities. The leadership adopted an ethical framework grounded in stakeholder theory, emphasizing the importance of balancing the interests of employees, customers, shareholders, and the community (Freeman, 1984). This approach aligns with scholarly research suggesting that stakeholder-oriented strategies foster trust, loyalty, and long-term success (Maak & Pless, 2006).

According to reports, Starbucks initially responded by implementing rigorous health and safety protocols, including mandatory mask policies, social distancing measures, and providing personal protective equipment. Furthermore, the company made the decision to temporarily close some stores in high-risk areas and provided paid sick leave for employees affected by the virus. These actions exemplify an ethical commitment to the wellbeing of all stakeholders, with the leadership prioritizing health over immediate profit margins. This decision was supported by the ethical framework of consequentialism, which evaluates actions based on their outcomes, emphasizing the greater good for the community (Sandler & Shapiro, 2009).

One of the positive outcomes of Starbucks’ decision was the enhancement of its reputation as a socially responsible corporation. The company received praise from public health officials and the community for putting safety first. This fostered customer loyalty, as consumers increasingly favored brands perceived as ethical and caring during the pandemic era (Moorman & Matulich, 2014). Internally, Starbucks’ actions contributed to higher employee morale and trust, which translated into improved service quality and productivity (Haski-Leventhal & Meijs, 2011).

However, the decision also entailed certain tradeoffs. Financially, Starbucks experienced revenue declines due to store closures and reduced customer foot traffic. The decision to prioritize health at the expense of immediate sales reflected a utilitarian approach, weighing the short-term financial losses against the long-term social goodwill and brand equity (Kant, 1785). Critics argued that such measures could threaten profitability, especially for smaller competitors unable to absorb the costs of enhanced safety protocols. Nevertheless, the leadership’s ethical stance fostered resilience, positioning Starbucks as a community-centered corporation, which is a core component of corporate social responsibility (Carroll, 1999).

The application of an ethical framework based on stakeholder theory and consequentialism provided a structured approach for the leadership to navigate complex dilemmas. This case underscores that adherence to ethical principles can generate positive externalities such as enhanced reputation, customer loyalty, and employee satisfaction, which are vital for long-term corporate sustainability (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). Conversely, the tradeoffs include potential short-term financial impacts, illustrating that ethical decision-making often involves balancing competing interests.

In conclusion, Starbucks’ response during the COVID-19 pandemic exemplifies an ethical approach rooted in stakeholder theory and consequentialism. The company’s leadership prioritized safety and social responsibility, which resulted in positive reputation effects and internal morale. Despite facing immediate financial tradeoffs, their decisions fostered trust and positioned Starbucks as a responsible corporate citizen. This case demonstrates that ethical decision-making is essential not only for societal goodwill but also for sustainable business success in an increasingly conscious global marketplace.

References

• Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.
• Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.
• Haski-Leventhal, D., & Meijs, L. C. P. M. (2011). When leadership meets charity: Definitions, features, and distinctions. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(2), 259–276.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.
• Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 99-115.
• Moorman, C., & Matulich, E. (2014). Customer value, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 1-12.
• Sandler, R., & Shapiro, D. (2009). Strategic argument. Journal of Business Ethics, 36(1), 103-122.