We as a society shouldn’t rely on the legal system to legitimize whether specific actions are right or wrong. The ability to determine an action is ethically or morally right or wrong; it should be an inept characteristic that is instilled into each of our moral compasses. The society that we live in today is completely different from that of 20 years ago. Today, it is frowned upon when an individual is treated unfairly based on his/her sex, age, race, and even a person’s sexual orientation more so than in the past. Not only do our morals and ethics gauge our individual actions, but so does the law.
It seems as though that whether an action is ethically right or wrong is not the driving force that governs a business’s practices. It seems that some businesses today don’t use morals and ethics to gauge their actions. Instead, it seems some entities rely primarily on the legal system to legitimize their actions.
It was stated in the introduction of this performance assessment on TaskStream that “Many believe that business entities should have an ethical duty to be socially responsible, to work towards increasing its positive effects on society while decreasing its negative effects” (TaskStream EST1, 2008). The attitude and actions carried out by Company Q are both unethical and socially irresponsible on multiple levels.
The recent actions of Company Q aren’t as unethical/immoral as other companies in case studies that we have read about throughout the course (i.e. Wal-Mart). Even though their actions aren’t as severe, their actions are still unethical on a variety of levels. There are three areas that could be improved regarding Company Q’s attitude toward social responsibility.
First, there are other viable options a company can choose instead of closing a store entirely. Just because a business is in a less-than-ideal location doesn’t mean that a business should close its doors. Instead, Company Q could reduce its overall size of the locations...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document