- 最后登录
- 2005-8-31
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 1054
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2003-8-27
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 2
- 积分
- 500
- UID
- 143578
 
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 1054
- 注册时间
- 2003-8-27
- 精华
- 2
- 帖子
- 1
|
152"The only responsibility of corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, is to make as much money as possible for their companies." ----7
Response:
Is the sole responsibility of corporate excutives to make as much money as possible for the companies within the law? The speaker claims so, but I disagree this statement partially. Although one of the accountability of the head of one company is to make profits for the whole corporation, he or she should take the interests of society, the mass for more consideration.
As a threshold matter, we must concede that making a lot of of profits is of great importance and significance for not only the companies themselves, but also the society. It is natural and reasonable that the executives are to maximize the value of shareholders, and magnify the salary or welfare of employees, so that the executives can own more abundant economic benefits, and the staff in companies would appreciate the goodness from employers, stimulating their impetus to make efforts for the task, as well as the shareholders, given increasingly profits and bonus, are willing to invest on the companies to broaden their range and size in business, which is a benign circle for the development of this companies. Furthermore, for society, if a corporation of great profits, it means more opportunities of employment and more pay for national tax; also, such cases of successful elites can encourage the spirit of enterprise and fair competition, which can largely promote more individuals to take their potential into full play, transforming to the contributions for the whole nation.
Nonetheless, the assertion that making money as much as possible within the law seems reasonable at first glance, however, as a matter or fact, I consider it precious, for there are always a lag between practical problems and improper behaviors to be corrected and the enactment of the related law. For instance, a country lack sufficient development and modernization, which the government is worried about the bread- and -butter problem, may have no energy and efforts to take other less pressing matters, such as environmental pollution, deforestation, into account, resulting in a blank in these aspects in the national law. Consequently, it is ostensibly legal for a company in an industrialized nation to dump rubbish into the sea of the poor one, and to make new-drug trials in human bodies in some undeveloped countries. Therefore, provided the behaviors of some firms stay in the law, in fact, they harms the interest of human life and endanger the system of morality standard.
As a result, it is unfairly to say the only purpose is to make profits for companies, even if they are legal, and the managers should concentrate on whether their companies have brought about the benefits for society, which is a breeding ground for their long-term development. They may put emphasis on the image of the companies, forming the singular, but healthy or vigorous culture in corporation; the mass obviously does not prefer to a company in greedy and venality. A apt illustration to underscore this issue is McDonald's, the famous worldwide fast food chains; in my city, when raining, McDonald's always prepare lots of free " umbrellas of love" for the public, which greatly helps individuals in trouble, gaining the respect and praise from the mass, and ensuring their ulterior market.
In sum, if the head of one company pays attention only to the profits, even if within the law, that is not equal to proper behaviors within the range of morality and ethic. To making money is justifiable, however, it is not the sole purpose for a manager: those who consider more of the welfare of the whole society and the populace will benefit from the goodness and interests in the long run.
谢谢指教 |
|