Should companies operate in Violent Areas:
|Yes |No | |The higher the risk, the bigger the reward |Easy mark for kidnapping | |Disease is still a bigger risk than violence |There are about 8.000 kidnappings per year, most of them foreign | | |workers and families | |Some industries have no choice (petrol) |The people who are willing to work there, are not ideal for working |
Yes, I think companies should feel free to do business all over the world, as long as they keep to the local law and regulations. Companies are the ones with the money, if all the companies stay away from violent countries or areas, then the local people will never have a better life. Unless the violent stops, but in most countries the violence will go on for many years (like Rwanda).
There are a lot of companies which are making big money in violent areas. The most money is made in sectors like intelligence gathering, investigations in local companies and security. And a lot of constructing companies are making big money in Iran and Afghanistan, that is logical because a great deal of western governments are investing a lot of money in rebuilding those countries. Even the mining industry are booming in those countries, because bigger companies want to buy out.
Some economists are saying that taking risk in violent countries can bring you from the second place to the market leading position. So for those companies it is worth taking the risk. As the writer of the 'Point Yes' (from the handout) said: 'Some industry don't have the luxury of avoiding the violent countries, take the petroleum industry'. If you take a look at...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document