Running Head: Ethical Issues In Consumer Electronics Industr

Running Head Ethical Issues In Consumer Electronics Industry1ethical

In the consumer electronics industry, players are competing with each other to create cutting edge devices that are more appealing to the consumers. Due to this need, majority of the manufacturers have employed various strategies such as partnering with third party manufacturers in a bid to lower operational costs hence being able to present consumers with competitively priced devices. However, it is imperative to note that adoption of the various strategies by the industry players has led to a number of ethical issues such as unfair labor practices as looked into in the following section.

One, partnering with third party manufacturers has led to a major ethical concern when it comes to utilization and management of labor. A good example is Apple and the manufacturing company Foxconn. After scrutiny, it was established that Foxconn had provided unsafe working conditions and also employed child labor in the production processes (Stahl, Timmermans & Flick, 2017). Foxconn was a major partner to Apple hence leading to an ethical question regarding Apple’s stand on fair labor practices. Foxconn represents many factories in Asia that partner with players in the consumer electronics industry.

The manufacturing plants tend to practice unfair labor practices in a bid to maintain low operational costs. If the firms cut ties with the manufacturers, they are likely to experience rising operational costs hence leading to an ethical dilemma. Two, the players in the consumer electronics industry are also facing an ethical dilemma when it comes to quality assurance. Mainly, the assembling process depends on key components and parts from other manufacturers. Last year, Samsung Galaxy Note 7 phones exploded and it was later found out that batteries which were manufactured by a third party had been faulty (Newcomb, 2017).

This highlighted an ethical dilemma being faced by a majority of consumer electronics manufacturers. There are third parties that do not comprehensively ensure quality products are manufactured. When faulty components lead to problems such as exploding phones, the brand owner’s reputation is heavily impacted. There is a need for performance agreements to be reached to avoid such occurrences in the future. Three, there is an ethical dilemma when it comes to corporate social responsibility. In various regions such as China and Indonesia, the manufacturing plants established by industry players have been causing a lot of pollution and there have been calls for the companies to invest in measures that will help curb pollution. However, due to the intensity of the pollution especially in China, it is deemed costly meaning that the companies must be ready to part with millions of dollars which may have an impact on their overall performance (Stahl et al., 2017).

The companies feel that investing heavily in corporate social responsibility will negatively impact their business performance hence are not ready to do so. From the above accounts, it can be seen that ethical issues surrounding the consumer electronics industry mainly entail the manner in which production is attained. Partnering with third party manufacturers has been the leading cause of issues as the players strive to attain minimal operational costs. Third party manufacturers do not put in place sufficient measures for upholding ethical business performance which is then blamed on the industry players. In order for a firm to deal with the said ethical issues, it is imperative that an agreement on performance between it and the third party manufacturers is reached.

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical considerations within the consumer electronics industry are multifaceted, arising primarily from the strategies employed to sustain competitive advantage and cost efficiency. A predominant concern relates to labor practices, especially in regions where manufacturing is outsourced to third-party companies. The case of Apple and Foxconn exemplifies this issue, highlighting unsafe working conditions and child labor employment (Stahl, Timmermans & Flick, 2017). Such practices raise critical questions about the responsibility of brand owners to enforce fair labor standards throughout their supply chains.

The pressure to minimize costs often compels electronics companies to rely heavily on low-cost manufacturing partners, which can result in exploitation and unethical labor conditions. Although severing ties with such manufacturers could alleviate these ethical issues, firms risk increased operational costs, creating a dilemma between profitability and ethical responsibility. Ethical sourcing and rigorous supplier audits are crucial strategies that companies should adopt to ensure fair labor practices. Implementing comprehensive codes of conduct, regular inspections, and transparent reporting mechanisms can foster accountability and improve working conditions.

Another significant ethical challenge pertains to quality assurance, especially when components are sourced from third-party suppliers. The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 incident underscores the repercussions of inadequate quality control, where faulty batteries led to device explosions and damage to brand reputation (Newcomb, 2017). Reliance on external suppliers necessitates clear contractual obligations and performance standards to guarantee product safety and reliability. Companies should establish strict testing protocols and continuous supplier evaluations to mitigate risks associated with substandard components.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) constitutes an additional critical dimension of ethical issues in this industry. Manufacturing in developing regions such as China and Indonesia often involves substantial environmental pollution. Despite external pressures and regulatory frameworks, many firms hesitate to invest adequately in environmental protection due to perceived costs, which can be substantial (Stahl et al., 2017). The reluctance stems from fears that CSR initiatives may impair financial performance, posing a classic conflict between profit motives and societal responsibilities.

The pollution caused by manufacturing activities has significant ecological and health implications, prompting calls for increased corporate accountability and sustainable practices. Ethical corporate behavior requires integrating CSR into core business strategies, focusing on reducing environmental impacts through technological innovation, waste reduction, and adherence to international environmental standards. For example, companies such as Apple have begun investing in renewable energy sources and cleaner manufacturing practices, exemplifying proactive responses to environmental ethics issues.

Addressing these ethical challenges requires a multifaceted approach that includes establishing enforceable supplier agreements, investing in quality assurance systems, and embedding CSR into corporate governance. Transparency and accountability are pivotal in fostering trust among consumers and stakeholders, ensuring that economic pursuits do not compromise ethical standards. The integration of sustainability and ethical considerations not only enhances corporate reputation but also ensures long-term viability in an increasingly conscientious market environment.

References

• Newcomb, A. (2017, January 23). Samsung finally explains the Galaxy Note 7 exploding battery mess. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com
• Stahl, B., Timmermans, J., & Flick, C. (2017). Ethics of emerging information and communication technologies: On the implementation of responsible research and innovation. Science and Public Policy, 44(3), 369–381.
• Chan, E. S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and supply chain management in the electronics industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(2), 279-291.
• Lee, K. (2014). Sustainable supply chain management in the electronics industry: A case of Apple Inc. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(1), 41-55.
• Winston, G. C. (2019). The environmental impacts of electronics manufacturing. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(4), 2015-2022.
• Blowfield, M., & Frynas, J. G. (2005). Setting new agendas: Critical perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility in the developing world. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), 131-149.
• Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 13, 32-33.
• Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.
• McKinnon, S., & Tigan, B. (2020). Ethical supply chain management in electronics manufacturing: Strategies and challenges. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 56(2), 22-34.
• European Environment Agency. (2017). Environmental impacts of electronic waste. https://www.eea.europa.eu