Haley asked the question "Do you think that corporate responsibility
should extend to the community where the outsourced work is?"
I think that corporate responsibility extends to all stake holders in a company. I do not mean stake holder in the direct sense of money invested into a company. I mean it in the sense of people who will be affected by an aspect of the company, people who work for the company, people in the companies community, people at other companies who make parts for the first company, these are all people who can be effected by the companies actions.
It becomes the corporations responsibility to take care of these stake holders, because without them happy or satisfied, they can join together and form a coalition or action group to fight the corporation's ways which will be bad for business. Regardless of whether the stakeholders are stateside or in a different country, the corporation should still be responsible for its actions.
Do you think that it is responsible for a corporation to outsource the work in the first place?
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
2.12.13 blog V (A)
"Do you believe self regulation is more or less effective than governmental regulatory agencies? Why?"
Governmental Regulatory Agencies, such as the FDA, Interstate Commerce Commission, and the SEC, have been created over the years in order to create and maintain a fair business environment and to help protect consumers. Before these agencies were created it was solely up to the business to regulate and maintain their business and ensure they were providing a safe product for their consumers.
However, there are problems with both; with self regulation, it is up to the business and the business alone to regulate it's actions, in a perfect world they would run their business honestly and fairly, unfortunately that is not the case. One business may be self regulated and be an upstanding business in the community. While another business is selling the same product, however it is made using excess amounts of lead. Without a regulatory agency both business will remain open while one harms its customers and the other may have business harmed because people lump the similar stores into the same category.
With regulatory agencies, it creates a fair playing field among business, but it also allows for a safer product market for the consumer. It can also allow for more eco-friendly businesses because they have to adhere to the agencies standards. A downfall to the agencies is sometimes they are behind the ball on what is necessary for their standards. With self regulation, a business can hear about a way to provide a safer product, and figure out a way to implement it into their business right away. Some regulations can also be outdated and harm the way that a company is doing their business. They might not be doing anything wrong, but if it goes against the agency's standards it will still be stopped.
Self regulation allows for innovative thinking for a better business and better product, but the government agencies create standards for a whole industry preventing individuals from doing something harmful. There certainly can be one without the other, but with both self regulation and government agencies, it creates an environment where there are safe standards and requirements, while allowing businesses to work beyond those standards and requirements to be more regulated and even more advanced than just the government agency and its regulations.
Final Thoughts; Self regulation can be more effective than governmental regulation agencies, but more often than not, a government agency will help to regulate a business in a more positive way than just self regulation.
Do you think government agencies are always thinking about what is best for the consumers? Or is there something or someone else at the top of their priority list?
Governmental Regulatory Agencies, such as the FDA, Interstate Commerce Commission, and the SEC, have been created over the years in order to create and maintain a fair business environment and to help protect consumers. Before these agencies were created it was solely up to the business to regulate and maintain their business and ensure they were providing a safe product for their consumers.
However, there are problems with both; with self regulation, it is up to the business and the business alone to regulate it's actions, in a perfect world they would run their business honestly and fairly, unfortunately that is not the case. One business may be self regulated and be an upstanding business in the community. While another business is selling the same product, however it is made using excess amounts of lead. Without a regulatory agency both business will remain open while one harms its customers and the other may have business harmed because people lump the similar stores into the same category.
With regulatory agencies, it creates a fair playing field among business, but it also allows for a safer product market for the consumer. It can also allow for more eco-friendly businesses because they have to adhere to the agencies standards. A downfall to the agencies is sometimes they are behind the ball on what is necessary for their standards. With self regulation, a business can hear about a way to provide a safer product, and figure out a way to implement it into their business right away. Some regulations can also be outdated and harm the way that a company is doing their business. They might not be doing anything wrong, but if it goes against the agency's standards it will still be stopped.
Self regulation allows for innovative thinking for a better business and better product, but the government agencies create standards for a whole industry preventing individuals from doing something harmful. There certainly can be one without the other, but with both self regulation and government agencies, it creates an environment where there are safe standards and requirements, while allowing businesses to work beyond those standards and requirements to be more regulated and even more advanced than just the government agency and its regulations.
Final Thoughts; Self regulation can be more effective than governmental regulation agencies, but more often than not, a government agency will help to regulate a business in a more positive way than just self regulation.
Do you think government agencies are always thinking about what is best for the consumers? Or is there something or someone else at the top of their priority list?
Monday, February 11, 2013
2.11.13 - The Fourth (B)
In response to Ariana Barone's blog and question;
"Do you think social media is still worth it even though it does not reach everyone?"
I think that in today's day and age where technology reaches almost all aspects of our lives, advertising through social media is almost a necessity. It allows for a company to advertise its business, in most cases, for free. They can easily create a facebook page and a twitter account that they in turn manage and post as they feel necessary to allow people, who already like the store or they wouldn't be linked to their accounts, to know that there is a certain deal, bargain, sale, or new merchandise, available right that instant in their store.
By having a social media page, where customers "like" the page and subscribe to the updates, it allows the customer to feel a personable connection to the store, they feel as though they are getting sales updates before anyone else and will in turn, go to that store for the new deal that they just found out about. It makes the customer feel that much more special and that much more connected to the business.
The social media allows for the people who like the store to stay in formed, but it also allows for the fans to share their favorite business and the sales by "retweeting" or "sharing" a business post. This allows for a theoretical sharing to "everyone". One or two people share to their 500+ friends then one or two more share to their friends and it creates a large network of shared data, all through one simple post by a business.
I think social media is still worth it, and will be worth it as long as it remains prevalent in our society, and business still have the ability to control it themselves.
Do you think social media advertising will someday be more popular than television or print ads?
"Do you think social media is still worth it even though it does not reach everyone?"
I think that in today's day and age where technology reaches almost all aspects of our lives, advertising through social media is almost a necessity. It allows for a company to advertise its business, in most cases, for free. They can easily create a facebook page and a twitter account that they in turn manage and post as they feel necessary to allow people, who already like the store or they wouldn't be linked to their accounts, to know that there is a certain deal, bargain, sale, or new merchandise, available right that instant in their store.
By having a social media page, where customers "like" the page and subscribe to the updates, it allows the customer to feel a personable connection to the store, they feel as though they are getting sales updates before anyone else and will in turn, go to that store for the new deal that they just found out about. It makes the customer feel that much more special and that much more connected to the business.
The social media allows for the people who like the store to stay in formed, but it also allows for the fans to share their favorite business and the sales by "retweeting" or "sharing" a business post. This allows for a theoretical sharing to "everyone". One or two people share to their 500+ friends then one or two more share to their friends and it creates a large network of shared data, all through one simple post by a business.
I think social media is still worth it, and will be worth it as long as it remains prevalent in our society, and business still have the ability to control it themselves.
Do you think social media advertising will someday be more popular than television or print ads?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)