State and defend your personal position in agreement with Milton Friedman’s opposition to (p. 148…

State and defend your personal position in agreement with Milton Friedman’s opposition to (p. 148 of text, Slide 11 of PowerPoint file) or William Byron’s and Andrew Savitz’s support of making social responsibility a key criterion in business planning and management (or explain and justify a middle ground between the two). See the notes accompanying Slide 11 for some issues you might consider in developing your initial posting.

Slide number 11 :

Description: C:\Users\LENOVO~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image002.gif

Notes in slide 11

Near the end of his chapter on social responsibility, after having built a case for that principle on the basis of the views and experiences of a good number of businesses and business leaders, Father Byron turns to Milton Friedman to provide the other side of the “balance sheet.” Friedman argued that acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility is not only unprofitable, it is subversive. As you saw in your other reading for this week (chapter 6 of the The Triple Bottom Line), Savitz goes to some length to refute Mr. Friedman’s arguments, ending with the Mintzberg quote shown on this slide (pp. 103-104). The second discussion forum this week asks you to state and justify your own position with respect to social responsibility. Which position is correct – Friedman’s or Byron’s and Savitz’s – and why? As you ponder this question, think about the assumptions that underlie the two positions, how either has played a role in the crises that have scarred our economy in recent years, and how following your preferred position would yield benefits as we move ahead