Posted by Professor Comisso
on March 9, 2009, 11:35 am, in reply to "Sample questions for the final exam--first installment"
132.239.208.141
Please see "first installment" for general instructions. This is the SECOND part of three.
Sample questions:
4. Ian Davis argues that neither “corporate social responsibility” nor “the business of business is business” offer adequate moral frameworks for reconciling the legitimate needs of businesses to make money and their moral obligations to the larger society. Rather, he proposes that “large companies build social issues into broader strategy” and respect an “implicit social contract” which carries “obligations, opportunities and mutual advantage for both sides.” Is this simply a more politically correct way of endorsing the position of Friedman, or is it substantially different? How exactly is it different? Compare and contrast how each (Friedman and Davis) would analyze the following cases, commenting on whom you agree with (if either) and why, taking care to refute the position(s) contrary to your own:
--Al Dunlap’s restructurings of Sunbeam-Oster and/or Scott Paper OR Michael Price’s devotion to shareholder value;
--Google’s willingness to restrict access in China when the government requests it OR
Nike’s use of subcontractors in Indonesia paying $2.28/day (we are not told by Maitland how long a working “day” is).
In morally assessing either of these cases, you may wish to examine whether there should be only one “social compact,” or whether it is permissible for social compacts to vary depending on the particular society in which and to which they apply.
5. Although business practices can be harmful to individuals—whether employees, consumers, shareholders, or local communities—it is not always the case that these practices are morally unacceptable. How can we differentiate between morally acceptable and morally unacceptable business practices? Are there some practices that are simply too harmful to permit? Be sure to give reasons for your answers, drawing upon the Friedman, Davis, Almeder and the “corporate social responsibility” debate.
Based on your answer, evaluate two of the following cases:
--the decision to market the 1971 Ford Pinto;
--Valujet’s cost-cutting practices, such as its use of outsourcing and its treatment of employees;
--“Dwarf tossing” at a nightclub in Illinois;
--Yahoo’s decision to turn over data to the Chinese government resulting in the arrest of a journalist for publishing “classified” materials
6. We frequently made a distinction between “legal” justice and “moral” justice. Briefy describe the differences between the two, and analyze any three of the following cases, explaining whether or not the requirement of one or both were met.
--Nike’s use of Indonesian subcontractors employing young women for $2.28/day;
--Aero Products’ decision to issue pink slips to Lauris and Gove in a company “restructuring” a few months after they refused their supervisors’ request to “rationalize the data;”
--The imposition of strict emissions controls on a chemical company, many of whose products are marketed abroad where they compete against those of other companies subject to no such regulations.
--Yahoo’s supplying information in China that led to the arrest of a journalist
7. Friedman argues that the best society results from businesses acting in their own self-interest. Would Ladd and Davis agree? Why or why not? Do you agree? Why or why not? Make sure to explain carefully the arguments of each author, as well as your own reasons. Then, answer one of the following questions.
--If you agree with Friedman, justify the business practices of Valujet and show why a good society should encourage this method of operation;
--If you agree with Ladd, how might you bring moral considerations to bear on company decisions?
--If you agree with Davis, evaluate the behavior of Google in China. Should “social compacts” vary according to the norms of the society in which a company operates or must they b e based on universal values to be meaningful?
156
Message Thread:
« Back to thread