9 Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Environmental Sustainability, and Strategy PDF

Preview

Summary

study...

Description

CHAPTER 9

Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Environmental Sustainability, and Strategy Learning Objectives

© Boris Lyubner/age fotostock

THIS CHAPTER WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND:

LO 1

How the standards of ethical behavior in business are no different from the ethical standards and norms of the larger society and culture in which a company operates.

LO 2

What drives unethical business strategies and behavior.

LO 3

The costs of business ethics failures.

LO 4

The concepts of corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability and how companies balance these duties with economic responsibilities to shareholders.

We don’t think of ourselves as do-gooders or altruists. It’s just that somehow we’re trying our best to be run with some sense of moral compass even in a business environment that is growing. Craig Newmark—Founder of Craigslist

Sustainability, ensuring the future of life on Earth, is an infinite game, the endless expression of generosity on behalf of all. Paul Hawken—Founder of Erewhon Trading Co.; cofounder of Smith & Hawken

The time is always right to do what is right. Martin Luther King, Jr.—Civil rights activist and humanitarian

Clearly, in capitalistic or market economies, a company has a responsibility to make a profit and grow the business. Managers of public companies have a fiduciary duty to operate the enterprise in a manner that creates value for the company’s shareholders. Just as clearly, a company and its personnel are duty-bound to obey the law and comply with governmental regulations. But does a company also have a duty to go beyond legal requirements and hold all company personnel responsible for conforming to high ethical standards? Does it have an obligation to contribute to the betterment of society, independent of the needs and preferences of the customers it serves? Should a company display a social conscience

by devoting a portion of its resources to bettering society? Should its strategic initiatives be screened for possible negative effects on future generations of the world’s population? This chapter focuses on whether a company, in the course of trying to craft and execute a strategy that delivers value to both customers and shareholders, also has a duty to (1) act in an ethical manner; (2) be a committed corporate citizen and allocate some of its resources to improving the well-being of employees, the communities in which it operates, and society as a whole; and (3) adopt business practices that conserve natural resources, protect the interests of future generations, and preserve the well-being of the planet.

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY BUSINESS ETHICS? Ethics concerns principles of right or wrong conduct. Business ethics is the application of ethical principles and standards to the actions and decisions of business organizations and the conduct of their personnel.1 Ethical principles in business are not materially different from ethical principles in general. Why? Because business actions have to be judged in the context of society’s standards of right and wrong, not with respect to a special set of ethical standards applicable only to business situations. If dishonesty is considered unethical and immoral, then dishonest behavior in business—whether it relates to customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders,

CORE CONCEPT Business ethics deals with the application of general ethical principles to the actions and decisions of businesses and the conduct of their personnel.

260

LO 1 How the standards of ethical behavior in business are no different from the ethical standards and norms of the larger society and culture in which a company operates.

PART 1

Concepts and Techniques for Crafting and Executing Strategy

competitors, or government—qualifies as equally unethical and immoral. If being ethical entails not deliberately harming others, then businesses are ethically obliged to recall a defective or unsafe product swiftly, regardless of the cost. If society deems bribery unethical, then it is unethical for company personnel to make payoffs to government officials to win government contracts or bestow favors to customers to win or retain their business. In short, ethical behavior in business situations requires adhering to generally accepted norms about right or wrong conduct. As a consequence, company managers have an obligation—indeed, a duty—to observe ethical norms when crafting and executing strategy.

WHERE DO ETHICAL STANDARDS COME FROM—ARE THEY UNIVERSAL OR DEPENDENT ON LOCAL NORMS? Notions of right and wrong, fair and unfair, moral and immoral are present in all societies and cultures. But there are three distinct schools of thought about the extent to which ethical standards travel across cultures and whether multinational companies can apply the same set of ethical standards in any and all locations where they operate.

The School of Ethical Universalism CORE CONCEPT The school of ethical universalism holds that the most fundamental conceptions of right and wrong are universal and apply to members of all societies, all companies, and all businesspeople.

According to the school of ethical universalism, the most fundamental conceptions of right and wrong are universal and transcend culture, society, and religion.2 For instance, being truthful (not lying and not being deliberately deceitful) strikes a chord of what’s right in the peoples of all nations. Likewise, demonstrating integrity of character, not cheating or harming people, and treating others with decency are concepts that resonate with people of virtually all cultures and religions. Common moral agreement about right and wrong actions and behaviors across multiple cultures and countries gives rise to universal ethical standards that apply to members of all societies, all companies, and all businesspeople. These universal ethical principles set forth the traits and behaviors that are considered virtuous and that a good person is supposed to believe in and to display. Thus, adherents of the school of ethical universalism maintain that it is entirely appropriate to expect all members of society (including all personnel of all companies worldwide) to conform to these universal ethical standards.3 For example, people in most societies would concur that it is unethical for companies to knowingly expose workers to toxic chemicals and hazardous materials or to sell products known to be unsafe or harmful to the users. The strength of ethical universalism is that it draws on the collective views of multiple societies and cultures to put some clear boundaries on what constitutes ethical and unethical business behavior, regardless of the country or culture in which a company’s personnel are conducting activities. This means that with respect to basic moral standards that do not vary significantly according to local cultural beliefs, traditions, or religious convictions, a multinational company can develop a code of ethics that it applies more or less evenly across its worldwide operations. It can avoid the slippery slope that comes from having different ethical standards for different company personnel depending on where in the world they are working.

CHAPTER 9

Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Environmental Sustainability, and Strategy

261

The School of Ethical Relativism While undoubtedly there are some universal moral prescriptions (like being truthful and trustworthy), there are also observable variations from one society to another as to what constitutes ethical or unethical behavior. Indeed, differing religious beliefs, social customs, traditions, core values, and behavioral norms frequently give rise to different standards about what is fair or unfair, moral or immoral, and ethically right or wrong. For instance, European and American managers often establish standards of business conduct that protect human rights such as freedom of movement and residence, freedom of speech and political opinion, and the right to privacy. In China, where societal commitment to basic human rights is weak, human rights considerations play a small role in determining what is ethically right or wrong in conducting business activities. In Japan, managers believe that showing respect for the collective good of society is a more important ethical consideration. In Muslim countries, managers typically apply ethical standards compatible with the teachings of CORE CONCEPT Muhammad. Consequently, the school of ethical relativism holds that a “one-sizeThe school of ethical fits-all” template for judging the ethical appropriateness of business actions and the behaviors of company personnel is totally inappropriate. Rather, the underlying relativism holds that thesis of ethical relativism is that whether certain actions or behaviors are ethically differing religious beliefs, customs, and behavioral right or wrong depends on the ethical norms of the country or culture in which they norms across countries take place. For businesses, this implies that when there are cross-country or crosscultural differences in ethical standards, it is appropriate for local ethical standards and cultures give rise to multiple sets of standards to take precedence over what the ethical standards may be in a company’s home concerning what is ethically 4 market. In a world of ethical relativism, there are few absolutes when it comes to right or wrong. These business ethics, and thus few ethical absolutes for consistently judging the ethical differing standards mean correctness of a company’s conduct in various countries and markets. that whether businessThis need to contour local ethical standards to fit local customs, local notions related actions are right of fair and proper individual treatment, and local business practices gives rise to or wrong depends on the multiple sets of ethical standards. It also poses some challenging ethical dilemmas. prevailing local ethical Consider the following two examples. standards.

The Use of Underage Labor

Under ethical relativism, In industrialized nations, the use of underage workers is considered taboo. Social there can be no one-sizeactivists are adamant that child labor is unethical and that companies should neifits-all set of authentic ther employ children under the age of 18 as full-time employees nor source any ethical norms against which products from foreign suppliers that employ underage workers. Many countries to gauge the conduct of have passed legislation forbidding the use of underage labor or, at a minimum, company personnel. regulating the employment of people under the age of 18. However, in Eretria, Uzbekistan, Myanmar, Somalia, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Sudan, North Korea, Yemen, and more than 50 other countries, it is customary to view children as potential, even necessary, workers. In other countries, like China, India, Russia, and Brazil, child labor laws are often poorly enforced.5 As of 2013, the International Labor Organization estimated that there were about 168 million child laborers age 5 to 17 and that some 85 million of them were engaged in hazardous work.6 While exposing children to hazardous work and long work hours is unquestionably deplorable, the fact remains that poverty-stricken families in many poor countries cannot subsist without the work efforts of young family members; sending their children to school instead of having them work is not a realistic option. If such children are not permitted to work (especially those in the 12-to-17 age group)—due to pressures imposed by activist groups in industrialized nations—they may be forced to go out on

262

PART 1

Concepts and Techniques for Crafting and Executing Strategy

the streets begging or to seek work in parts of the “underground” economy such as drug trafficking and prostitution.7 So, if all businesses in countries where employing underage workers is common succumb to the pressures to stop employing underage labor, then have they served the best interests of the underage workers, their families, and society in general? Illustration Capsule 9.1 describes IKEA’s approach to dealing with this issue regarding its global supplier network.

The Payment of Bribes and Kickbacks A particularly thorny area facing multinational companies is the degree of crosscountry variability in paying bribes.8 In many countries in eastern Europe, Africa, Latin America, and Asia, it is customary to pay bribes to government officials in order to win a government contract, obtain a license or permit, or facilitate an administrative ruling.9 In some developing nations, it is difficult for any company, foreign or domestic, to move goods through customs without paying off low-level officials. Senior managers in China and Russia often use their power to obtain kickbacks when they purchase materials or other products for their companies.10 Likewise, in many countries it is normal to make payments to prospective customers in order to win or retain their business. Some people stretch to justify the payment of bribes and kickbacks on grounds that bribing government officials to get goods through customs or giving kickbacks to customers to retain their business or win new orders is simply a payment for services rendered, in the same way that people tip for service at restaurants.11 But while this is a clever rationalization, it rests on moral quicksand. Companies that forbid the payment of bribes and kickbacks in their codes of ethical conduct and that are serious about enforcing this prohibition face a particularly vexing problem in countries where bribery and kickback payments are an entrenched local custom. Complying with the company’s code of ethical conduct in these countries is very often tantamount to losing business to competitors that have no such scruples—an outcome that penalizes ethical companies and ethical company personnel (who may suffer lost sales commissions or bonuses). On the other hand, the payment of bribes or kickbacks not only undercuts the company’s code of ethics but also risks breaking the law. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) prohibits U.S. companies from paying bribes to government officials, political parties, political candidates, or others in all countries where they do business. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has antibribery standards that criminalize the bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions—all 35 OECD member countries and 7 nonmember countries have adopted these standards. Despite laws forbidding bribery to secure sales and contracts, the practice persists. As of June 2014, 263 individuals and 164 entities were sanctioned under criminal proceedings for foreign bribery by the OECD. At least 80 of the sanctioned individuals were sentenced to prison. In 2014, Alcoa agreed to pay $384 million to settle charges brought by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that it used bribes to lock in lucrative contracts in Bahrain. French oil giant Total settled criminal charges for $398 million the prior year for similar behavior in Iran. Other wellknown companies caught up in recent or ongoing bribery cases include Archer Daniels Midland, the global agribusiness trader; Swiss oil-field services firm Weatherford; Avon; and Walmart. In 2013, the Ralph Lauren Corporation struck a non-prosecution agreement with the SEC to forfeit illicit profits made due to bribes paid by a subsidiary in Argentina. When the parent company found the problem, it immediately reported it to the SEC and provided substantial assistance with the investigation. The company paid only $882,000 in penalties (above the forfeited profits) as a result.

ILLUSTRATION CAPSULE 9.1

IKEA’s Global Supplier Standards: Maintaining Low Costs While Fighting the Root Causes of Child Labor

© Holly Hildreth/Moment/Getty Images

Known for its stylish ready-to-assemble home furnishings, IKEA has long relied on an extensive supplier network to manufacture its products and support its rapid global expansion. It has worked hard to develop a successful approach to encourage high ethical standards among its suppliers, including standards concerning the notoriously difficult issue of child labor. IKEA’s initial plan to combat the use of child labor by its suppliers involved (1) contracts that threatened immediate cancellation and (2) random audits by a thirdparty partner. Despite these safeguards, the company discovered that some of its Indian suppliers were still employing children. IKEA realized that this issue would crop up again and again if it continued to use low-cost

suppliers in developing countries—a critical element in its cost-containment strategy. To address this problem, IKEA developed and introduced its new code for suppliers, IWAY, which addresses social, safety, and environmental issues across its purchasing model. When faced with a supplier slip-up, IKEA works with the company to figure out and tackle the root cause of violations. Using child labor, for example, can signal bigger problems: production inefficiencies that require the lowest-cost labor, lack of alternative options for children like school or supervised community centers, family health or income challenges that mean children need to become breadwinners, and so on. IKEA takes action to provide technical expertise to improve working conditions and processes, offer financing help at reasonable rates, run training programs onsite, and help develop resources and infrastructure in areas where its suppliers are based. The IKEA foundation also began focusing on these issues through partnerships with UNICEF and Save the Children aimed at funding long-term community programs that support access to education, health care, and sustainable family incomes. As of 2016, their efforts have improved the education opportunities of more than 12 million children in 46 different countries. IKEA’s proactive approach has reduced some of the risks involved in relying on suppliers in developing countries. Through its approach, IKEA has been able to maintain its core strategic principles even when they seem to be at odds: low costs, great design, adherence to its ethical principles, and a commitment to a better world.

Note: Developed with Kiera O’Brien. Sources: IKEA, “About the Company: This Is IKEA,” www.ikea.com/ms/en_US/this-is-ikea/people-and-planet/people-and-communities/; Elain Cohen, “Banning Child Labor: The Symptom or the Cause?” CSR Newswire, www.csrwire.com/blog/posts/547-banning-child-labor-thesymptom-or-the-cause; UNICEF Press Center, Joint Press Release, www.unicef.org/media/media_89819.html (accessed February 2, 2016).

Using the Principle of Ethical Relativism to Create Ethical Standards Is Problematic for Multinational Companies Relying on the principle of ethical relativism to determine what is right or wrong poses major problems for multinational companies trying to decide which ethical standards to enforce companywide. It is a slippery slope indeed to resolve conflicting ethical standards for operating in different countries without any kind of higherorder moral compass. Consider, for example, the ethical inconsistency of a multinational company that, in the name of ethical relativism, declares it impermissible

Codes of conduct based on ethical relativism can be ethically problematic for multinational companies by creating a maze of conflicting ethical standards.

263

264

PART 1

Concepts and Techniques for Crafting and Executing Strategy

to engage in kickbacks unless such payments are customary and generally overlooked by legal authorities. It is likewise problematic for a multinational company to declare it ethically acceptable to use underage labor at its plants in those countries where child labor is allowed but ethically inappropriate to employ undera...