"There is one and only one social responsibility of business," wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist, "That is,

admin2017-01-17  30

问题     "There is one and only one social responsibility of business," wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist, "That is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its prof its." But even if you accept Friedman’s premise and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders’ money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies—at least when they are prosecuted for corruption.
    The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $ 15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a "signal" that a company’s products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company’s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse "halo effect," whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others.
    Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company’s products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect.
    The study found that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties. Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms’ political influence, rather than their CSR stand, that accounted for the leniency: Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines.
    In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company’s record in CSR. "We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern, such as child labour, or increasing corporate giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials," says one researcher.
    Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect, rather than the other possible benefits, when they decide their do-gooding policies. But at least they have demonstrated that when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
.The author views Milton Friedman’ s statement about CSR with

选项 A、tolerance.
B、skepticism.
C、uncertainty.
D、approval.

答案C

解析 态度题。根据关键词Milton Friedman定位到第一段。文章开头讲密尔顿·弗里德曼曾经写道:“企业有且只有一个社会责任,那就是利用它的资源从事旨在增加企业利润的活动。”紧接着文章转折并提出things may not be absolutely clear-cut。由此推知,作者对此的态度是uncertainty,故C项为正确答案。A项“包容”,B项“怀疑”,D项“赞同”均不符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/jLEZ777K
0

最新回复(0)