The Biblical Purpose of Business - Literature review Example

? Christian View of Business and Its Purpose in Society Article The Biblical Purpose of Business The article d “Towards a ment on the Biblical Purpose of Business” has been written by Jeff Van Duzer, Randal S. Franz, Gary L. Karns, Tim Dearborn, Denise Daniels and Kenman L. Wong. The main intention of these writers behind writing the essay was to identify the vocation of business at the institutional stage instead of the individual manager or employee stage which has been one of the central points in much of the wider discussions related to business and vocation. The paper also identifies if trade action needs to be involved exclusively by means of antagonistic visionary means which would be enthusiastically embraced (Duzer, 2012). One of the most appealing aspects stated by the authors has been related to the definition of business and its relation with the theological perspective. The article asserts that business is a form of institution since it is a means through which a group chooses to resolve one of its social problems. From the views of theology, the main objective of business is to assist in the creation of God’s empire. The unique role that the business has to play in that effort is to serve the society by manufacturing the goods and the services required to facilitate the pursuance of the main objective and the creation of the giftedness of the person in the business. The article tends to lay theological framework for comprehending business in terms of God’s creativity, human depravity as well as Christ’s redemption. The article is well written and is also quite significant and thus contributes meaningfully to the understanding of the readers and inspires in accomplishment of their daily work within the noble calling of business. It can be reflected that the redemption view of business leads an individual to the particular situation that is valued by the Christians. The authors state the fact that instead of just restricting the acceptable business conduct, it forces the individuals to enter into business as a type of service offered to the neighbor and finally the individual’s participation in creating the sovereignty of God. The individual is capable of freely entrusting upon the Spirit of God in order to give wisdom, competence, creativity as well as compassion for their involvement in business since the people tend to fulfill the redemption purpose of God. In the absence of the solid theology, the Christians in business do not have a proper sense of purpose and a comprehension of the spiritual environment in which they tend to function. When the way of doing business lacks moral, then its sole objective of attaining the organizational goals might be eradicated and hence the focus is generally upon the accomplishment of the personal goals. Therefore, it is quite significant to inculcate theology with the help of which the business man will be competent of operating morally and thus will also be capable of conducting business in an ethical way. The focus of the businessman must not solely be on maximizing the profitability factor but also on serving the society according to the directions demonstrated by god (Duzer, Franz, Karns, Dearborn, Daniels, & Wong, n.d.). Article 2: The Social Responsibility of Business is to make its Profits The article “The Social responsibility of Business is to make its Profits” has been written by Milton Friedman. The key intention of the article is to demonstrate the fact that the main objective of social responsibility is to enhance the profitability factor of business. The author in his article describes the social responsibility of not the businesses but of the corporate executives, which is his main thesis statement. Friedman has argued that the supporters of the social responsibility of business were generally moralizing socialism. However, in the present times, the debate is generally regarding the characteristic of capitalism. The most relevant point that has been noticed in the article is that the corporation is an artificial person and can possess artificial responsibilities. He demonstrated the fact that business is mainly an artificial construct. The proprietors as well as the corporate executives can be held responsible towards the society. Friedman asserted the fact that individual proprietors of the companies are free to hold socially responsible behaviors. However, since they do not possess monopolistic powers, they are of little concern. If the corporate executives were given the opportunity to implement social responsibility then in such conditions they would have been capable of doing so by acting against the wills and the interests of the companies. It can be argued that the person who administers the businesses is responsible to offer the shareholders with adequate returns. However, it can be claimed that this is not the main reason behind the existence of the business. The main objective of the business is to generate value in the society. The businessmen can create such value by transacting in the market. The quantum of such value is a function of the readiness of the customer to pay for the goods and the services of the company. It can therefore be argued that the businesses tend to possess social responsibilities. One of the significant responsibilities is the creation of the value and the other one is to make profits. However, one gets into the debate of social responsibility because of the fact that the real world is not as orderly as viewed by the economists as well as strategists. Friedman asserted regarding the reduction of pollution. However, it can be argued that the profits that are created at the expense of social impacts can be considered as ill-gotten profits. It is significant for the parties concerned to bear the cost (Fox, 2012). The article assists in comprehending the main purpose of the business. It further aids in comprehending the fact that the complexity of implementing social responsibility demonstrates the virtue of private competitive enterprises. It makes it necessary for the people to be accountable for their own actions and thus makes it complex for them to manipulate other people for self-centered or unselfish purpose. The article can assist in understanding the roles and the responsibilities of the businessmen in being a part of the society (Friedman, 1970). Article 3: “What is Business For?” The article named “What is Business For” has been written by Charles Handy in the year 2002. The article intends to find out the reasons behind the existence of the business. It also attempts at comprehending if the traditional ownership as well as governance structures are suited to the knowledge economy. The main thesis of the study is grounded on the purpose of the business. It endeavors at comprehending the fundamental problems related to the notion of culture and assumptions related to the business. The most relevant aspect in the article has been related to the fact that the business is not just for the shareholders. The objective of the business is not just to earn profit but also to properly utilize the earned profit so that the company can focus upon growth or do something better. Making money is not the sole purpose for the corporations. It can instead be considered as an outcome. The businesses are supposed to meet the needs of the stakeholders and not just operate purely for the shareholders. In simple terms, the businesses main purpose is to realize the fact that they are held responsible for the society at large. It can be analyzed that the businesses must be created with the main objective of serving the society. The members of the society who assist the company in attaining the goals must be offered dividends. The notion that the financial providers are the owners of the company is outdated. The author has been capable of identifying how the value of the company can be ascertained. He mentions that the value of the company can be determined through its brands, patents, intellectual property and the skills of the workforce. In the modern times, it is quite significant to focus upon the needs of the community and upon the skills and the talents of the individuals. The article states the fact that good corporate behavior will assist in transforming the current business culture in the eyes of the public. However, they must be supported by the vision of purpose of the business. Most of the people wrongly presume that the main motto of the business is to generate profit. Therefore, it is significant to redefine the rationale of the business with regard to the understanding of the public. One aspect that seemed to be quite interesting in the article has been related to the fact that if the organizations neglect the environmental responsibility then they might lose the customers. However, if the companies do not pay due focus upon the needs and the wants of the society then they might lose the significant members of the workforce. The concept that can be utilized in the business is that the contemporary businesses need to view themselves as a part of the community comprising the individuals. This will assist them at serving the society in a better way and will facilitate them to meet their needs. The evaluation of success for an organization needs to consist of results for others along with outcomes for the members of the company (Handy, 2002). References Duzer, J. V. (2012). Why business matters to god. Retrieved from http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/review/code=3888 Duzer, J.V., Franz, R. S., Karns, L. K., Dearborn, T., Daniels, D. & Wong, K. L. (n.d.). Towards a statement on the biblical purposes of business. Retrieved from http://www.businessasmission.com/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Toward_theology_of_business_-_VanDuzer_et_al.pdf Fox, J. (2012). The social responsibility of business is to increase ... what exactly? Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/fox/2012/04/you-might-disagree-with-milton.html Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. Retrieved from http://www.umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf Handy, C. (2002). What's a business for? Harvard Business Review, pp. 49-55. Read More