In 1962, Michael Friedman proposed a doctrine in which he states that a company whose goal is to increase profits (legally) has the only social responsibility of a company is to pass on the profits to its stakeholders. In other words, the company does not do justice to its stakeholders by utilizing part of their profits for supporting social welfare causes. Friedman points out stakeholders would not invest in a company from which they cannot the maximum benefits. [1]
Over the years, this doctrine has been challenged by managers and executives as It provides a viable marketing opportunity for the company by showcasing their shift in company policy, from a profit-minded company to a company that gives back to the society. The company can align …show more content…
Both companies have been in close competition of the market share and have expanded their business by venturing into other food brands for example Pepsi owns brands such as Doritos chips, Aquafina water, Gatorade, Lipton teas etc. PepsiCo’s annual report of 2013 indicated that its customer base was over 3 billion and became the second largest food and beverage company in the world. [2] In the 2000s, obesity in the US was at sharp rise with two out of three adults and one out of three children being obese. Public awareness of the link between sugary drinks and obesity came to the limelight which posed a threat to PepsiCo’s sales. The company received flak when it was accused of consuming a vast majority of water from the surrounding areas of its factories which caused water shortages in India, United States and United …show more content…
It also took up spreading awareness of the use of cloned meat and milk by the food industry to enhance their throughput, which would ultimately affect the consumer in the long run if consumed. They revamped all their packaging material to be sourced from sustainable sources and all ingredients to be locally sourced and free from any kind of genetic engineering. [4]
In 2013, The foundation was awarded a National achievement award by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy which recognizes corporations for its philanthropic initiatives. Forbes listed Ben & Jerry’s in the fourth position of its top 10 brands of ice-cream list, put it ahead of its rival Nestle. Ben & Jerry’s continues to be a successful brand it is today through its social and environmental initiatives. [6]
This example proved the Friedman Doctrine to be wrong. This goes to show that If the company leaders have a firm belief in social responsibility, the company can reap the benefits by having a solid relationship with its customers thereby ensuring the future of the
Over the years, this doctrine has been challenged by managers and executives as It provides a viable marketing opportunity for the company by showcasing their shift in company policy, from a profit-minded company to a company that gives back to the society. The company can align …show more content…
Both companies have been in close competition of the market share and have expanded their business by venturing into other food brands for example Pepsi owns brands such as Doritos chips, Aquafina water, Gatorade, Lipton teas etc. PepsiCo’s annual report of 2013 indicated that its customer base was over 3 billion and became the second largest food and beverage company in the world. [2] In the 2000s, obesity in the US was at sharp rise with two out of three adults and one out of three children being obese. Public awareness of the link between sugary drinks and obesity came to the limelight which posed a threat to PepsiCo’s sales. The company received flak when it was accused of consuming a vast majority of water from the surrounding areas of its factories which caused water shortages in India, United States and United …show more content…
It also took up spreading awareness of the use of cloned meat and milk by the food industry to enhance their throughput, which would ultimately affect the consumer in the long run if consumed. They revamped all their packaging material to be sourced from sustainable sources and all ingredients to be locally sourced and free from any kind of genetic engineering. [4]
In 2013, The foundation was awarded a National achievement award by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy which recognizes corporations for its philanthropic initiatives. Forbes listed Ben & Jerry’s in the fourth position of its top 10 brands of ice-cream list, put it ahead of its rival Nestle. Ben & Jerry’s continues to be a successful brand it is today through its social and environmental initiatives. [6]
This example proved the Friedman Doctrine to be wrong. This goes to show that If the company leaders have a firm belief in social responsibility, the company can reap the benefits by having a solid relationship with its customers thereby ensuring the future of the