Posted: August 27th, 2022

Friedman’s view of individual freedom in relation to the stakeholder’s theory contract theory

Friedman’s view of individual freedom in relation to the stakeholder’s theory contract theory
Utilizing one of the moral frameworks (KANTIAN ETHICS) mentioned in class and in your studying, critique the
conduct/actions of TWO of the major folks described and/or interviewed ( EDWARD SNOWDEN & GEN.MIKE HAYDEN) in the three Hour Frontline
Documentary “United States of Secrets and techniques”. One of these folks have to be Edward Snowden.
Your framework guided critique ought to embody, however in no approach be restricted to, your basic Assessment of
their character and motivations, their intent versus end result, and HOW and WHY you got here to your
conclusions.
Bear in mind all that we’ve coated about writing successfully! Outlines, drafts, and last paper ought to
conform to the three half construction: Thesis-evidence-conclusion.
The paper needs to be Four-5 pages in size, 1.5 line spacing and submitted in MS Phrase format in the
applicable homework drop field on our BB website.
A title web page needs to be included with applicable class and title info however shouldn’t be counted
towards the content material web page depend.
The paper is an individual project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees).
Friedman was an American economist and a believer in the free market system; he believes a sole company accountability was to maximize income for its shareholders entire had the individual’s freedom to make the most of their revenue share as they so wished. Moreover, he believed the firm may work greatest with no exterior interventions, reminiscent of authorities rules, thus this well-known shareholder theory of capitalism. Nevertheless, this theory has been criticized for violating customers’ rights and has led to different theories, reminiscent of stakeholder theories that foster company social accountability and inclusivity. At the moment, it’s important that corporates adhere to their company social accountability in direction of the public. This paper seeks to expound on Friedman’s view on individual freedom regarding stakeholder theory and social contract theory.
In accordance to Friedman’s, the shareholders’ theory focuses on the firm and its shareholders the place the firm is compelled to maximize on making n income for its progress and the satisfaction of its stakeholders; nevertheless, the stakeholder’ theory focuses on not solely the firm stakeholders however inclusive of the firm it is surrounding. Whereas the shareholders’ theory focuses extra on individual freedom, the social contract views the company surroundings as one huge ecosystem whereby all the events’ wants want to be glad to improve firm success and longevity. Friedman’s deontological argument is extra to the revenue maximization fairly than company social accountability. He argues that these in the firms’ administration place are fiduciaries of the stakeholder; thus, their solely motive is to maximize income whereas satisfying the stockholders’ expectations.
Subsequently, these in administration are probably to reduce income in the event that they interact in different unrelated actions that don’t venture revenue maximization. His view on capitalism and freedom describes the firm not having any obligation to the public since its solely precedence revenue maximization; thus, the stakeholders ought to on any kind of company below their very own choice. Nevertheless, Friedman’s views on company social accountability have been put below scrutiny and infrequently referred to as being incoherent and lowkey unethical for these in management. Friedman emphasizes individual freedom whereby these in management, for essence, supervisor share chargeable for fulfilling stakeholders’ expectations coupled with the deontological norms. His approaches to stakeholder theory. The shareholder’s mannequin is extra inclined to privatize their positive factors, and in return, externalizing losses.
Notably, Friedman advocated for companies to interact in open and free competitors with out participating in fraud in the course of of making income. Moreover, they need to comply with the regulation and customs define to purchase society however not be chargeable for their well-being. Friedman vies company social accountability as subversive and socialistic he feels CSR permits for the extension of energy to the state or society that can eland to the redistribution of wealth and goes in opposition to his norms of the property being social name and no matter one does iht it’s his or her accountability greater than being his or her actual accountability of one other occasion may very well be the state or society. In is vie the acts of social accountability, firstly, will reduce the income of a enterprise for essence via acts of company charity being one of the social duties. Secondly, CSR implies that these in the management place might be extra dedicated to social accountability and in violating the contractual obligations of being extra social accountability greater than doing what they’re employed to do in the firms,
To make his idea acceptable, Friedman should distance his idea from the restricted legal responsibility doctrine and settle for the social reusability embedded in company that they’ve to fulfill to categorical consistency and modify his enterprise’s shareholders’ mannequin. Stakeholders’ theory differs from Friedman’s. Corporates needs to be introduced to account by the regulation to restore any damages brought on by their entities in at this time’s world. Friedman’s proactive theory that argued the significance of income as the actual deal in enterprise present itself in at this time’s financial realm as enterprise folks go the additional mile to maximize income at the expense of society; with the enacted of las and police, they’ve come in helpful to regulate the efficiency of the firm and be certain that they fulfill their social accountability.
Friedman’s view of company social accountability belittles the moral requirements for management, emphasizing individual freedom. On the different hand, the stakeholder theory, in accordance to Edward freeman, emphasizes son the positivity of transparency of the folks round the firm when contemplating their wants and pursuits. These embody the workers, suppliers, prospects, future potential prospects, firm house owners, authorities entities involving taxation and regulation and even their opponents, and collectively. Moreover, take into account constructing public relations amongst stakeholders, constructing native parks for the neighbor, or cleansing the surroundings. It will finally be ensuing in a long-haul success. Stakeholder’s theory focuses on the productiveness of the CSR.
Subsequently, corporates accountability has an obligation past simply producing income by together with society by complying with the financial entities, moral, philanthropic obligations, and authorized points. It will facilitate sustainability and income in the lengthy overhaul. Proponents of the stakeholder’s theory criticized Friedman shareholders theory claiming that the doctrine was insisted in issues of company social accountability as the shareholder’s theory as extra targeted on the individual freedom ore that taking ingot account the different folks which might be affected by the choices and means via which they made the income. Friedman failed thought for motive to individual’s which focuses on revenue past the ethics. In his argument, Friedman claimed company was not an individual, thus shouldn’t be chargeable for accountability; nevertheless, for the stakeholder’s theory, firms have moral authorized and ethical duties to fulfill. Subsequently, firms ought to conform to society’s fundamental rule and the embodied legal guidelines whereas contemplating the ethics that outline company social accountability.
Conclusion
Milton Friedman’s doctrine believes the sole accountability for an organization is to maximize income, which has since been criticized as not catering to the folks round. The stakeholder’s theory is concentrated on the outdoors, as they consider in pleasing the outdoors will convey extra returns on the inside. Subsequently, stakeholder’s theory advocates for company social accountability that as removed from what freedman championed. At the moment, the company subject has quite a few conflicts as dilemmas organizations from firms, and exterior components try to win in the very aggressive enterprise subject. Proponents of the stakeholder’s theory criticized Friedman shareholders theory claiming that the doctrine was insisted in issues of company social accountability as the shareholder’s theory as extra targeted on the individual freedom ore that taking ingot account the different folks which might be affected by the choices and means via which they made the income.

References
Francés-Gómez, P. (2018). Social contract theories. In The Routledge Companion to Enterprise Ethics (pp. 96-112). Routledge.
Neiman, P. (2013). A social contract for worldwide enterprise ethics. Journal of Enterprise Ethics, 114(1), 75-90.
Johannes Jahn & Rolf Brühl, 2018. “How Friedman’s View on Individual Freedom Relates to Stakeholder Theory and Social Contract Theory,” Journal of Enterprise Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 41-52,

Order | Check Discount

Tags: Friedman’s view of individual freedom in relation to the stakeholder’s theory contract theory