Douglas says, “In my book you either do it right or you get eliminated.

 It is important to know that the success of an organization cannot be achieved without a great commitment to the cause. The things were not going well for the Teldar Paper, as it was having issues in its business. Last year, losses observed for the company were around $110mn. The company was having 33 different vice presidents and they were earning a handsome amount from the company. But when their overall performance was measured in economic terms, the results were zero. They were not doing anything for the company. That’s why Douglas said that one should do it right or either get eliminated if he can’t do it right. In economic terms, he is referring to the term that if vice presidents and leaders having handsome salaries and perks are not able to grow the sales and revenue figures of the company, and there is no evident improvement, then they should be eliminated from the company, as they were not providing any economic benefits to the company.

            Keeping the ethical terms and concepts propagated by Milton Friedman, it is evident that doing right means is doing everything just for earning the profits for the company. He came up with an essay, which showed his real idea about corporate social responsibility and to be ethical in the business conduct. His essay was titled "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits.” This idea states that corporates are not formed to show social responsibility, as it is not their job, rather they should only work to make money. So, if corporates are making money and profits, they are doing the right thing. But when ethical concepts of CSR are analyzed, they are quite opposite to this concept. They assert that if corporates are socially responsible and giving back to society, then they are doing the right thing (Fernando & Muralidheeran)

Q. 2

            It is important to understand when the business is working on a smaller scale, and then an owner may be able to handle all of its matters. But when businesses tend to grow bigger, and they expand to different locations, then it is impossible for the manager to manage things on his own. This is the time when he needs help from other resources, and that’s why managers are hired by large firms to manage all the affairs of the company. These managers are selected as agents to work on behalf of the owner, and make decisions, which are in favor of the owner and his organization. They have so many ethical, legal and administrative elements to follow so that they can justify their work as agents of the owner, who appointed them at a particular position, by delegating authority to make considerable decisions. If an agent is making any decision without the knowledge of the owner, but such an owner will be liable for that particular decision as being the owner of the company (Johnston, 2020)

            It is important to understand the relationship between an owner and manager as per principal and agent theory, what responsibilities are owed by the manager. He is getting paid by the owner to make the right decisions every time, and follow the ethical guidelines. But there is a situation where a manager is constantly firing employees of a certain religion, and he has openly shown his intentions as well, then an owner may have to face a lawsuit in this regard for practicing this discrimination at work, which is prohibited by the law. Such kind of harmful decisions made by a manager is evident to show that he is not committed to the ethical and operational responsibilities given by the owner. The owner and manager’s relationship can be a complex one, as there are not many control measures to manage this relationship, and if it continues like this, then things can get worst for the owner.

Q. 3

      If ideas given by Milton Friedman and similar scholars are analyzed, then it is not a difficult thing to understand that Weyerhaeuser Company does not hold any social responsibility. The company has said on its web page that there are so many sustainability-related rules set by the U.S government, and they try to adhere to those rules in the best possible manner. Even they go step further in many situations. Even the company has mentioned that its operations being run in Uruguay and China are also following the local rules and laws set by them for logging purposes. If they would have violated any laws set by the government, then they might be considered a bad company, not following the law, but they are following the guidelines set by the laws of the governments (Brusseau, 2012)

            However, when it comes to social responsibility and being ethical, and where the law has no role to play, then in such cases, they cannot be held responsible for any of their acts, which were done to make money and profits. The company came into this business to earn profits; they did not come up with the idea of serving the essence of corporate social responsibility. The company has done, what law has asked it to follow, but as far as ethical terms are considered it is their personal choice. A business does not have the responsibility to work for society and make decisions, which go in their favor. If they follow this concept, then one day they may lose their business. So, the focus should always be to make money and profits.

References of Business Ethics

Brusseau, J. (2012). Business Ethics. Creative Commons.

Fernando, A., & Muralidheeran, K. (n.d.). Business Ethics: An Indian Perspective, 3e. Pearson Education India.

Johnston, K. (2020). Owner-Manager & Principal-Agent Conflict. Retrieved April 26, 2020, from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/ownermanager-principalagent-conflict-35905.html