The retailer Marks and spencer has set themselves a range of environmental and ethical targets to enable them to meet their (CSR) Corporate social responsibilities. Do you think that the benefits and costs involved justify how they do business?
The question is asking if we think the benefits and costs involved in reaching their CSR by setting environmental and ethical targets and asks us to justify the answer with reference to real life situation and situations. There are several key terms used in this question such as CSR which is corporate social responsibilities this means the decision a business makes to accept responsibility for its social, environmental and ethical actions. A business would then compile a CSR report to help make this decision. Ethical targets are the targets a business uses to attempt to reduce its negative ethical impact; this involves situations where human rights would occur. Environmental targets are how the business can reduce the negative impact a business has on the environment.
The question is about Marks and Spencer whose target demographic is middle class, higher age band citizens, we are asked to argue for and against the benefits and costs that justify their plan of action regarding these environmental and ethical targets. M+S use a strategy called the 5 pillars which are the 5 main targets the business uses. M+S’s 5 pillars are that by 2012 they aim to, become carbon neutral, no waste to go into landfill, to increase the use of sustainable sourcing, help increase the quality of lives of people in the supply chain and help customers and employees live healthier lifestyles. By coming carbon neutral Marks and Spencer can reduce the amount of waste and pollution that they put into the air thus gaining a better reputation in the business world with customers and shareholders alike. The same goes for dumping waste into landfill, by reducing the amount of waste that goes into landfill Marks and Spencer are shown to be attempting...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document