E=mc^2, this famous equation was the most important step towards the creation of the atomic bomb; dynamite was created to explode mines but its main use was during WWI to kill people; for that case, should Einstein and Nobel be suit or held responsible in some way for de damage that their creations made to humanity? Most people will probably agree that no, they should not be held responsible for that, why? Because, they didn’t have the intention to use their creations in that way. The Corporation’s main subject is that, the responsibility of the corporation for the consequences of their acts and products, yes it is desirable that Corporations clean the mess that they are mainly responsible for, at this documentary we see a lot of facts of the damage cause by corporate practice, also it can be seen that for companies, specially (but not only) American and British companies, their main driver is profit, and when it comes to take business decisions CEO’s and stock holders care mainly about the money.
The facts are the strongest points in this film, now the problem comes when the Corporation is compare with a person, a human, the corporation is compare with a psychopath because they don’t regret what they do, they lie, don’t maintain lasting relationships, they don’t care about others, they do not comply with norms and do not accept that they have committed a mistakes, first of all, this are things that all humans have practice at a certain stage of their life, that doesn’t mean that humans are psychos nor that means that the corporation is, second, of course the big problem about the corporate structure comes from the fact that people confuses them with humans and compare them to the point that, thanks to American legal tradition of common law that gives a lot of weight on precedent court decisions, Corporations are persons, with all rights under the law, laws are good but what is lacking in this case is common sense, because laws can not regulate all activities and they shouldn’t. There is an interesting point that is not openly touch but it is imply, these activist are appealing to a deontological[1] position that has its foundation on moral obligation and justice; but decision in the corporate world are taken upon consequences, and the main consequence is profit, business culture in America is founded over the protestant tradition of hard work and the right to profit out of it, when CEO’s take decisions, they are educated to obey the Law or at least not to break it, to fallow the rules of your profession and try to do the best professional practice, we now that not all fallow this, but CEOs do try to have the best professional practice, they do what is best for their clients, but the clients are not the consumers or the community, the clients are the stock holders, because is their assets the ones that are at stake first, the CEO does have power to change corporate practice, but this is the power to negotiate with the people that can take the decision, the investors. “When you have more power is more difficult to use it”[2], first because you don’t have the last word, the board has the last word, second because you are dealing with people and to try to impose a view what you are going to get is rejected and third, although clients are very important for CEOs, clients are not always right, they just don’t know it and CEOs always find that to try to please stock holders is not easy and recommendable, the only real power that CEOs have is the power of been heard and that their opinions are taken into consideration.
If CEOs have power to make their opinions heard and many of this CEO’s have a global conscious that is more needed this days why they don’t try to convince stockholders, it seems that many CEOs don’t take that decision because they are near retirement and they know that it is not an easy battle if it is not supported by profits.
The corporative structure is not more powerful that any individual, it is just a little more difficult to make it move into another direction because it involves more people, what the documentary doesn’t mention is that corporations are own not by a few people, they can be controlled by few but own by thousands of people. Individuals can make a difference and the ones that can really boost change, are consumers, the power of many (costumers) give the individual (CEO) enough arguments to convince the board to change. “Our costumers have told us that they decide where they shop based on whether the business is a good neighbor” this is what David North form Tesco says, trying to explain their decision for going “green” as a company.[3]
Profits should not be against ethics, more a more consumers are considering the actions made by companies in favor of common good, the “Green movement” is now been taken seriously, companies like Wal-Mart, which is not known for the best corporate practices, “recently became the largest purchaser of organic cotton for clothing”[4] this company thought that it will cost about 20 to 30 percent more than not organic cotton, but what they found out is that cost is about the same. Cases like this can be found more and more, and with the high prices of oil and gas, consumers are also interested in safer and cheaper energy resources and the key is in the fact that they should be renewable not like limited oil and gas. Venture capitalist have seen that profits are good in this kind of investments about one percent of all the money invested last year went to “green business”, social responsibility and responsibility to the environment is slowly moving into the corporate practice because the environment is becoming a commodity. Green is the next generation of business, but still if we don’t change our minds it will also create problems.
The big change of mind hast to do with How much is enough? Michael Moore has a good question in The Corporation; would it hurt to be half a billionaire instead of a billionaire? Competence and wanting to have more, is what is really is making this world to pass a very bad moment.
People have power consumers are the most powerful force that can make the corporate world to change. In the documentary when people abolish a corporation that was not good for the town, a woman said that the difference between corporation and government was that in government you can participate, that’s not true, it is easier to make the corporation to change and it moves faster because it is move by money, and consumers are the main source of profits, companies can produce anything, but if nobody buys it, it is not profitable, that is the reason why people have more power over corporation than government, government can be change every certain amount of time and it takes too much time to do it.
Bibliography
Porter, M.E., J.W. Lorsch and Noria N. 2005. Siete sorpresas para los nuevos CEO. EXPANSION MANAGEMENT.
Flynn V., E. 2006. Force of Nature. Newsweek.
Adler, J. 2006. The Greening of America, NewsweekBunnin, N. and E.P., Tsui, Glosario de términos filosóficos (en inglés), Retrieve Sept. 20. 2006, web site: http://www.filosofia.net/materiales/rec/glosaen.htm.
[1] An ethics based on acting according to duty or doing what is right, rather than on achieving virtue or on bringing about good consequences. (http://www.filosofia.net/materiales/rec/glosaen.htm)
[2] Porter, M.E., J.W. Lorsch and Noria N. 2005. Siete sorpresas para los nuevos CEO. EXPANSION MANAGEMENT
[3] Flynn V., E. 2006. Force of Nature. Newsweek.
[4] Adler, J. 2006. The Greening of America, Newsweek
The facts are the strongest points in this film, now the problem comes when the Corporation is compare with a person, a human, the corporation is compare with a psychopath because they don’t regret what they do, they lie, don’t maintain lasting relationships, they don’t care about others, they do not comply with norms and do not accept that they have committed a mistakes, first of all, this are things that all humans have practice at a certain stage of their life, that doesn’t mean that humans are psychos nor that means that the corporation is, second, of course the big problem about the corporate structure comes from the fact that people confuses them with humans and compare them to the point that, thanks to American legal tradition of common law that gives a lot of weight on precedent court decisions, Corporations are persons, with all rights under the law, laws are good but what is lacking in this case is common sense, because laws can not regulate all activities and they shouldn’t. There is an interesting point that is not openly touch but it is imply, these activist are appealing to a deontological[1] position that has its foundation on moral obligation and justice; but decision in the corporate world are taken upon consequences, and the main consequence is profit, business culture in America is founded over the protestant tradition of hard work and the right to profit out of it, when CEO’s take decisions, they are educated to obey the Law or at least not to break it, to fallow the rules of your profession and try to do the best professional practice, we now that not all fallow this, but CEOs do try to have the best professional practice, they do what is best for their clients, but the clients are not the consumers or the community, the clients are the stock holders, because is their assets the ones that are at stake first, the CEO does have power to change corporate practice, but this is the power to negotiate with the people that can take the decision, the investors. “When you have more power is more difficult to use it”[2], first because you don’t have the last word, the board has the last word, second because you are dealing with people and to try to impose a view what you are going to get is rejected and third, although clients are very important for CEOs, clients are not always right, they just don’t know it and CEOs always find that to try to please stock holders is not easy and recommendable, the only real power that CEOs have is the power of been heard and that their opinions are taken into consideration.
If CEOs have power to make their opinions heard and many of this CEO’s have a global conscious that is more needed this days why they don’t try to convince stockholders, it seems that many CEOs don’t take that decision because they are near retirement and they know that it is not an easy battle if it is not supported by profits.
The corporative structure is not more powerful that any individual, it is just a little more difficult to make it move into another direction because it involves more people, what the documentary doesn’t mention is that corporations are own not by a few people, they can be controlled by few but own by thousands of people. Individuals can make a difference and the ones that can really boost change, are consumers, the power of many (costumers) give the individual (CEO) enough arguments to convince the board to change. “Our costumers have told us that they decide where they shop based on whether the business is a good neighbor” this is what David North form Tesco says, trying to explain their decision for going “green” as a company.[3]
Profits should not be against ethics, more a more consumers are considering the actions made by companies in favor of common good, the “Green movement” is now been taken seriously, companies like Wal-Mart, which is not known for the best corporate practices, “recently became the largest purchaser of organic cotton for clothing”[4] this company thought that it will cost about 20 to 30 percent more than not organic cotton, but what they found out is that cost is about the same. Cases like this can be found more and more, and with the high prices of oil and gas, consumers are also interested in safer and cheaper energy resources and the key is in the fact that they should be renewable not like limited oil and gas. Venture capitalist have seen that profits are good in this kind of investments about one percent of all the money invested last year went to “green business”, social responsibility and responsibility to the environment is slowly moving into the corporate practice because the environment is becoming a commodity. Green is the next generation of business, but still if we don’t change our minds it will also create problems.
The big change of mind hast to do with How much is enough? Michael Moore has a good question in The Corporation; would it hurt to be half a billionaire instead of a billionaire? Competence and wanting to have more, is what is really is making this world to pass a very bad moment.
People have power consumers are the most powerful force that can make the corporate world to change. In the documentary when people abolish a corporation that was not good for the town, a woman said that the difference between corporation and government was that in government you can participate, that’s not true, it is easier to make the corporation to change and it moves faster because it is move by money, and consumers are the main source of profits, companies can produce anything, but if nobody buys it, it is not profitable, that is the reason why people have more power over corporation than government, government can be change every certain amount of time and it takes too much time to do it.
Bibliography
Porter, M.E., J.W. Lorsch and Noria N. 2005. Siete sorpresas para los nuevos CEO. EXPANSION MANAGEMENT.
Flynn V., E. 2006. Force of Nature. Newsweek.
Adler, J. 2006. The Greening of America, NewsweekBunnin, N. and E.P., Tsui, Glosario de términos filosóficos (en inglés), Retrieve Sept. 20. 2006, web site: http://www.filosofia.net/materiales/rec/glosaen.htm.
[1] An ethics based on acting according to duty or doing what is right, rather than on achieving virtue or on bringing about good consequences. (http://www.filosofia.net/materiales/rec/glosaen.htm)
[2] Porter, M.E., J.W. Lorsch and Noria N. 2005. Siete sorpresas para los nuevos CEO. EXPANSION MANAGEMENT
[3] Flynn V., E. 2006. Force of Nature. Newsweek.
[4] Adler, J. 2006. The Greening of America, Newsweek
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario