Analysis of The Business of Business Is More Than Business Article by Laura Tyso - Essay Example

Rhetorical Analysis Rhetorical Analysis The article by Laura Tyson is an argument against the usual profit maximizing attitudeassociated with capitalistic organizations. The article considers the broader perspective of an organization’s environment and the impact of focusing too much on profit and monetary gains. The article is partly a response made against the argument put forward by pro-profit advocates. More specifically, it addresses the point raised by figures such as Robert Simons and Milton Friedman about profit maximization as the ultimate goal of organizations who necessarily view social involvement as a distraction (Tyson, 2013). In her article backed up by frequent rhetoric, Laura Tyson points out how the assumptions made by pro-profit advocates fail to account for the environmental context and their stakeholders, including customers, society, and shareholders. As such greater social responsibility and concern is beneficial for organizations, if anything, because social well-being correlates to empowered consumers, ethical employees, effective governments, and sound social infrastructure. The article highlights many organizations such as Apple that have made efforts in order to enhance workplace conditions for their global employees in an effort to put their image in a positive light and thus increase sales by maintaining goodwill (Tyson, 2013). Therefore, the article mainly aims to point out that social responsibility is not reducing the competitiveness of organizations but is actually doing the opposite by providing them with a competitive advantage. The article by Laura Tyson (2013) is an argument against profit maximization as opposed to social responsibility. Laura Tyson has therefore adopted rhetorical strategies in order to communicate her point persuasively. These specifically include the usage of ethos and logos frequently as compared to emotional rhetoric characterized by pathos. The argument is geared towards proving the point that profit maximization is not the sole purpose of capitalistic organizations but organizations also have obligations towards their stakeholders, including customers, shareholders, and society. Laura Tyson first highlighted the stance held by Milton Friedman and Robert Simons before proceeding to present an argument against their case. Laura Tyson has regularly backed up her claims by citing empirical studies that support her claims. Hence the usage of rhetorical strategies is evident in Tyson’s argument as she has tried to make a case against profit maximization by organizations. Laura Tyson (2013) has firstly used logos in order to counter the argument by Robert Simons and Milton Friedman. In doing so, Laura Tyson has logically proceeded to highlight the deficiencies in the two pro-profit advocates’ arguments against social responsibility. Hence the counter argument has focused on pointing out the shortcomings in the two arguments presented for profit maximization by competing organizations. Laura Tyson (2013) applies logic by pointing out that Friedman’s argument has constraints relating to business behavior. Friedman has focused towards increasing profit within the bounds of law and morality however, as Tyson (2013) points out, Friedman failed to realize the variance in time, location, and context. As such time, location, and the settings are not constant and change with each situation or geographical area. Given the variance in these variables, behavior is likely to differ across various geographical regions of the world and across temporal spaces. As a result, Laura Tyson (2013) explains Freidman’s argument is unfounded. Hence, it is visible that Tyson (2013) used logical rhetoric in order to discredit Friedman’s argument. Laura Tyson dissected the arguments put forward by Friedman in order to explain how his arguments are invalid. Again Tyson (2013) approached the argument by using logos where she highlights how shareholders also differ in their attitudes. While it is true that many shareholders are interested only in the high share price for capital gains, it is also true that many shareholders hold a long term vision as to the returns. Such shareholders are often concerned not only with the economic benefit that they receive after buying the share but the long run implications on the society as well. As such, these shareholders are more patient when it comes to selling off their shares for monetary gains and are far more interested in sustaining societal well being. Given the heterogeneous composition of the shareholder lot, organizations cannot simply dictate a particular way of conducting business, in this case, dismiss social responsibility. Because not all shareholders want to maximize their profits, organizations cannot simply gear themselves towards profit. By pointing out this fact, Laura Tyson (2013) has logically proceeded to explain how Friedman’s argument is invalid as it involves many assumptions that is not consistent with the environmental reality. As Laura Tyson (2013) proceeds with explaining the shortfalls in Friedman’s argument, she also employs a pathetical approach in order to further her stance. She does this by building trust and credibility by citing an empirical study as a source to support her claims. The study which found that many companies that have a long term mission attract greater patient investors complemented her stance on social responsibility and the preference of shareholders to invest in companies that have a long term mission beyond simple maximization of profit. The study was therefore meant as a reference to establish credibility by citing a study which is empirical and hence, holds more weight than an unsupported argument. The citation of the study was therefore an attempt to establish credibility by citing an acceptable source. Laura Tyson (2013) has therefore used pathos in order to back up her claims in an attempt to build greater reputation and trust by including a trusted source, which is an empirical study. Laura Tyson’s (2013) reference to relevant real-life examples also helps to add value to her argument. Her example of Apple being affected by revelations of keeping poor working conditions in one of its contractor’s factories in China adds logic to her points. Further the example allows Tyson (2013) to add weight to her argument by encouraging the audience to think for themselves. It also enables the audience to trust her example since Apple is not foreign to any consumer. By giving the example of Apple and many similar companies, she has connected her arguments to a real-life example that is likely to connect the audience to the issue. Additionally, the example is relevant to the case where companies suffer a decline in their sales as their reputation is damaged. Hence, relating her argument with an example was an attempt to help connect her audience with what she was trying to communicate. As such the author adopted a logical approach in order to steer the audience into relating with what Tyson (2013) was trying to point out. Laura Tyson (2013) has therefore used a combination rhetoric including pathos and logos in order to back up her arguments and make them more convincing. Hence, Tyson (2013) has used examples of companies as well as recent studies in order to support her claims with authentic and trusted sources so that she can build trust and credibility. The main aim is to support her argument by means of credible sources and such examples that relate the issue with something people are familiar with. In this case, every consumer knows about Apple, the smart phone brand. In addition people might even remember the news when poor working conditions in one of its Chinese contractors were revealed. Hence giving examples is a good way of presenting a logical argument that people are able to relate to. Much of the argument presented by Tyson (2013) is based on logic through which the author has tried to establish her stance and counter the argument presented by Friedman and Simons. Tyson (2013) has also used pathos by referring to empirical studies which are scientifically accepted as sound research that can be trusted. By doing so Tyson (2013) has forwarded her argument which relates to investments and long term vision of companies as they involve themselves in socially responsible business activities. In conclusion, the main argument presented by Laura Tyson (2013) is against profit maximization which is considered to be the ultimate aim in capitalism. She has specifically countered the arguments presented by Friedman and Simons where they propose that profit maximization is the sole interest of organizations. In countering these arguments, Tyson (2013) has logically pointed out that being socially responsible helps organizations be more competitive by enhancing their sales. This is supported by the fact that many shareholders look to invest in those organizations that have a sustainable long term vision and show a concern for all the stakeholders involved in their external business environment. As such, going after profit is no viable because it hurts the elements comprising the external environment. The large scale impact is that companies cannot be profitable unless governmental institutions are effective, consumers are empowered, and one’s employees are ethical. Therefore, Tyson (2013) has used a combination of logos and pathos in order to establish her case for being socially responsible. References Tyson, L. (2013). The business of business is more than business. Eco Business. Retrieved 6 February 2015, from http://www.eco-business.com/opinion/business-business-more-business/ Read More