Social Responsibility In John Macky's Whole Foods Market

Improved Essays
Social responsibility is a heavily disputed topic in the world of business and economics. John Mackey, co-founder of Whole Foods Market, claims that a business has multiple social responsibilities to each of its shareholders. He includes customers, employers, investors, and the community as part of the business’ stakeholders and claims that in fulfilling the needs of each group, the company must be mindful of the values of the other groups. On the other hand, Milton Friedman claims that there is no social responsibility of business, and that social responsibility falls on the government instead. Lastly, there is T.J. Rodgers who leans towards the arguments made by Friedman and objects against Mackey’s philosophy of altruism ahead of individual …show more content…
This is because, as Friedman says, an executive should be selected based on his ability to run a business, and not based on his knowledge on how to battle social issues like inflation (Friedman, 4). An executive who attempts to solve a problem they are not knowledgeable of, is running the risk of making matters worse. Additionally, there is no way for an executive to know how much of the company’s resources can be justifiably allocated towards general social interest. Should an executive stop at 5% revenue like Mackey, or should they be putting aside more or less of their resources? Again, there is no way for an average executive to know this. If someone ignores these warnings and attempts to give back to the community to gain some goodwill for their company, they would only be acting short sighted. Friedman says that this kind of behavior only reinforces the idea that the pursuit of profit is wrong and immoral, even when fair pursuit of profit is what a business is meant for (Friedman, …show more content…
A business that acts on social responsibility rather than shareholder interest is undermining the system of a free society. It simply is not proper or fair for a business executive to act as the judicial, legislative, and executive function all at once. The only responsibility of a business is to use its resources to engage in activities that increase profits, both for the business and its shareholders. To most, corporate social responsibility seems appealing on the surface, but the road to corporate fraud and wrongdoings can be paved with good

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    By using intelligent marketing strategies and launching very inefficient campaigns, consumers can be easily fooled and fail to analyze a company’s true motives. In “What’s Wrong with Corporate Social Responsibility? : The Arguments against CSR,” the author remarks that, “Since few customers closely scrutinize a company’s ethical claims,…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Next Step uses its financial status and ranks to buy people into the company. The CEO is selfish and only cares about the growth of the company. His character demonstrated that he is in the business for the wrongdoings. The way the CEO treats his employees, customers, and distributors is not exemplary. He mainly cares for the people who are on his side.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Their social purpose is to make profits, grow bigger and make much money as possible for its stakeholders. Individuals who run these corporations do not care about what impact their business have or how they affect the social life of other people. From my point of view, this is the main reason why he claims that the business owners care about the social responsibilities of their social life, but they don't take care of the same social responsibilities when it comes to running their businesses. The way he was proposing was right. Companies and firms should be allowed to make as much profit as they can, but in return, legislations that will demand the benefits created by the businesses to be used to take care of the externalities from their companies should be set.…

    • 1164 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Up until the mid to late 20th century, businesses were only recognised for doing one thing which was to increase their profit return to their investors within legal boundaries. However, as a result of an era of social activists, Carroll (1991) acknowledges Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as a further extension of a business’s arm to also act within ethical and philanthropic avenues that society would expect of businesses. Like most controversial discussions there is always two opposing views which I will introduce as those like Milton Friedman who opposed CSR as the only obligation a business had was to “make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of society” and to not simply do this would be to disadvantage the…

    • 1433 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Calkins and Jonathan Wight, first key criticisms toward Milton Friedman was about the description of the business manager role as to maximize profits for shareholders which is the CEO moral obligation. Calkins and Wight express their opposition to Friedman idea of narrowing the whole managerial concept on to maximizing profits because, profits play a big role in the market system in references to consumer’s preferences which is different from Milton Friedman concept. On Friedman point of view: There is a moral foundation required for a stable society and “Managers are to make as much money as possible for their owners and avoid other activities that reduce shareholder profits”. As it is emphasizes by M. Friedman:…

    • 759 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Stockholder Model

    • 1850 Words
    • 8 Pages

    In Joseph Heath’s paper “Business Ethics without Stakeholders”, he exposes that the fiduciary relationship between managers and shareholders seems like “concepts with explicit moral overtones” which might derive from the thoughts on serving “as a natural point of departure for the development of a theory of business ethics” (p.108). Yet, “[it is still a] blurring of the distinction between the pursuit of self-interest on the part of individuals and the maximization of profit on the part of firms” (p.109) Thus, the potential “moral hazard in the relationship between managers and shareholders” is likely to be misjudged and the genuine conflicts also arise since manager is unable to take shareholders’ side instantly for every moral action he made. He questions how far beyond a manager should rely on shareholder’s interests without noticing stakeholder’s concerns in which it reveals that there are “limitations of any theoretical approach to business ethics that takes obligations to shareholders as the sole criterion of ethical conduct in business” (p.112) My view is consistent with Heath’s view on the stockholder model in which I will argue that even though managers should act towards owner’…

    • 1850 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    But the deal only focussed on benefitting Paulson and everyone else was left empty handed. The question about picking the right RMBSs is completely ruled out because of the fact that Goldman allowed some clients to suffer with improper knowledge, knowing the fact that the housing market was set to fail. A bubble burst is not something that can be predicted but Goldman’s analysis showed that they believed that the housing market was very likely to fail. Had IKB and ICA known about Goldman’s stance, their behaviour towards the Abacus portfolio might have been…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This argument has two varieties which are: Businesses do not have necessary skills and experiences and they cannot afford to do anything except maximize profits (Winfield, 2014; 107). If both of these varieties are sound then it would provide very good reasons to believe in Shareholder Primacy. The one of the biggest social issues in the world is HIV/AIDs. Such businesses would not have skills and experiences to help these people but businesses will be able to help once they have generated enough profits to satisfy shareholders and remainder of profits will be used for charities. There are a lot of social issues that are not expected for businesses to overcome but it does not mean they are incapable of benefiting others.…

    • 1612 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Moreover, companies that involve in anything other than profit maximization are distorting the resource allocation and sabotaging the mechanisms of the market. This makes it contrary to the fundamental functions of a business to involve itself in social matters since a business is an economic entity rather than a social one and its responsibility is to adhere to the law. Therefore, a company would be engaging in an irresponsible venture if it does not seek to maximize profits. Moreover, it is argued that companies are responsible to shareholders and should not engage in social issues since that would raise a question of legitimacy. As such, managers should allow the shareholders to decide on the company’s involvement in social issues even if the company is competent enough to socially change the environment.…

    • 1398 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This casts serious doubt onto the morality of an executive’s social responsibility, the whole concept seems more like an excuse to act with impunity rather than a moral obligation. Additionally, there is nothing to say that a corporate executive knows what is best for society, they may know very little about how their actions will affect society as a whole. Friedman also extends this line of reasoning towards the shareholders that own a company. If some of them attempt to hold a social responsibility other than to the mutual benefit of the shareholders, they are effectively imposing an unjust tax on the other shareholders and stealing their property. However, Friedman does concede that if a corporation has a sole proprietor then they are free to use their company’s resources as they see fit, as it is their personal property to do with as they see fit; however in most corporation’s (especially larger ones) this is rarely the actual situation.…

    • 1459 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays