Contrast of the Two Articles Essay

When comparing the two articles, more comparison was on the view point of social responsibility but the contrast of the two articles focuses more on aspect of business ethics. Drucker spends far more time finding out the meaning of business ethics, and as stated earlier he breaks it down into more of different types of samples and other meanings than just the overall view of business ethics. Again, Freidman’s view was more on social responsibility being the term that faces and encourages business ethics, but what I found interesting was a little excerpt from George, (1999) in his titled book â€Å"Business Ethics,† here George is explaining the issues that approach business ethics, and even though this quote was used earlier in the writing, he states â€Å"some point out that self-interest would still require a business to obey the law and adhere to basic moral rules, because the consequences of failing to do so could be very costly in fines, loss of licensure, or company reputation. The noted economist Milton Freidman was a leading proponent of this view (George, 1999). â€Å" If this is the case, then it is noted that Freidman was a view point on that ethical decisions are made on the basis of consequences and not just on their social responsibility to their company and their actions. Now one could argue in depth that it is ones social responsibility to adhere to basic moral rules and the consequences that follow. But the contrast is that while Drucker believes that business ethics comes from one’s social responsibility to himself and his kingdom, Casuistry, â€Å"Business ethics undoubtedly is a close parallel to casuistry. Its basic thesis that ethics for the ruler, and especially for the business executive, has to express â€Å"social responsibility† is exactly the starting point of the Casuist. But if â€Å"business ethics† is casuistry, then it will not last long-and long before it dies, it will have become a tool of the business executive to justify what for other people would be unethical behavior, rather than a tool to restrain the business executive and to impose tight ethical limits on business (Drucker, 1970). † Conclusion So what does this all mean? My view on the contrast is that one is using the philosophy that business ethics is based on decisions and behavior from Drucker’s standpoint, to the contrast that, business ethics is based on consequences of certain business situations. Business ethics is broader in its term and uses more than just right and wrong in business aspects. There are far more things that cause business ethics to be a stable-ford in the business world. One’s behavior and responsiveness to situations is a main component to business ethics but that can’t be the determining factor when trying to pursue the actual meaning and how it affects a business. And even when social responsibility is a main component to business ethics and is quite equal on some aspects of the term, there will always be the argument that if it leans towards someone’s responsibility, is the decisions that are being made ethical, and if so is it more towards the person’s responsibility to society or to one’s business? References 1. Carroll, A. B. , Buchholtz, Ann K. (2006) Business & society: Ethics and stakeholder management Mason, Ohio: South-Western ISBN: 0324225814 2. George, Richard T. de (1999). Business Ethics. Prentice Hall Publishing, ISBN: 01307977723 3. Drucker, P. (1970) What Is Business Ethics New York, N. Y. New York Times Magazine pp. 32-33, 122-124, 126