An analysis of stakeholders and the impact that implementation of particular option will have on them - Case Study Example

Final paper There is no doubt that at the present moment the company may be at one of the most important crossroads in its development. Therefore, before deciding to choose one of the proposed three options, it is extremely important to conduct analysis of stakeholders and the impact that implementation of particular option will have on them. The option that is proposed to be adopted is the third one. The first and the most obvious stakeholder is TideeKleen itself. It is quite obvious that if the decision has negative consequences the company might collapse and all the efforts that were put into it will disappear in vein. There is little doubt in the fact that the third option is likely to have a positive impact on the image and reputation of the company. The latter is likely to react to it with a boost of performance. In this case the following opportunity emerges: the company will be able to restore its good name. However, the major challenge that is posed by the option is that it will probably have a negative impact in terms of finances, but in the long term perspective it will surely win. The next important stakeholder, the role of which cannot be undermined is Halo Ethical Fund. It is identified as the body that has made the biggest investment and, therefore, it will be affected by the decision a lot. It is quite obvious that this stakeholder is likely to experience serious negative impacts that are brought by the option three, since it will involve more investment and the price per stock is not likely to rise in the future. However, the best reaction in this case would be implementing the chosen option and making sure that it brings the positive consequence in the future. If this stakeholder takes half measures, the outcome will be devastating. Speaking of the opportunities that it might experience, one should point out that if option three works out, the performance of the company will improve and so will the return on investment. Nevertheless, in order to achieve it substantial investments are needed for the further development and Halo Ethical Fund may simply be short of the needed money in order to keep up the implementation of the option and experiencing the positive impact that it brings. Another stakeholder which is able to play an important role in the decision and is largely affected by the outcome is GSC, the company that is known to have issued an ultimatum. There is no doubt in that its interest in TideeKleen is largely financial. That is why in case the third option is chosen the anticipated financial losses are not what this stakeholder will favor. That is why the reaction that GSC is likely to show would first be concentrated on the opposition to the third option and afterwards making everything possible to remove the directors who support it. It is quite obvious that the actions that will be implemented might be rather harsh. Speaking of the available opportunities in this case, one should point out that GSC will be able to appoint its nominees and have an even bigger control over the company, despite a relatively small number of stocks that it holds. Nevertheless, the challenges that the implementation of the third option will bring may be disastrous four GSC as it will result in further losses in the short term. Finally, there is one more stakeholder that role of which should be discussed. It included the workers in the union. Their significance is beyond any doubt: they were able to present a third option which proposed an alternative solution to the problem that the company was facing. This group will be affected positively by the implementation of the third option as people will be able to secure their workplaces and there would not be any reduction. That is why the people might show willingness to work better and the performance will increase. What is more important is that the positive outcome of the endeavor largely depends on their contribution. In other words, the implementation of the third option is likely to provide the workers with the opportunity to show their skills and desire to work. Indeed, they will contribute to the significance of their role and reinforce the relationship with the employer. Nevertheless, there are also some challenges that are posed by the third option, namely the pressure that the workers will have to endure and the company will be working hard on minimizing the negative impact that they have had in the past. Having examined the stakeholders, it would be rather important to present the ethical assessment of the option that should be chosen. Thus, the third one is the option that should be implemented by the company, keeping in mind the peculiarities of the situation that it faces. According to it, the company is likely to work hard on restoring it image and will use every possible way to negate the destructive influence that it had. In addition to that, the fall of the price per stock is likely to be stopped and, probably, reversed. In order to defend the viability of this option, it would be rather advantageous to employ several ethical theories. The first one that might prove it effectiveness if Utilitarianism. Thus, it is largely thought that the instrumental approach towards the issue of corporate social responsibility is the most effective one as it is backed up by the numerous evidence that was obtained from successful companies. In other words, all the stakeholders are likely to win in the long run if they chose to suffer some financial losses in the short run. In addition to that Deontological Ethics may also be quite suitable when it comes to proving the validity of the position in question. Thus, according to it, every person should adhere to a universal maxim and no exceptions are allowed. It is beyond any doubt that the humanity should not harm the environment. That is why any option that does not eventually lead to minimizing this damage should be rejected. Finally, it may be rather suitable to analyze the main advantages of the option three and think about the possible refutations of them. This is likely to present a broad perspective on the issue and contribute to its defense. First of all, as it has already been mentioned, one of the most important points about it is the fact that that the company acknowledges the negative influence that it had and does its best to eliminate it. It is obvious that in this case the future is likely to be free of toxic waste and the majority of stakeholders will approve it. Another important aspect when it comes to implementing the option in question is the stability of the workforce. It is understandable that restructure or transfer overseas will damage the morale of the workers and they will no longer be able to do their best on the job. Contrary to that, if the company shows the team spirit and does not want to surrender to the difficult circumstances, this will probably have an extremely positive influence on the morale. Finally, if one takes a close look at the ultimate outcome of the option three, one will have to point out that it brings positive consequences for the biggest number of people that is possible in this situation. In other words, it brings the greater good. Indeed, in addition to the immediate stakeholders that were discussed in the first part, there is also a considerable number of other parties that will be affected indirectly. It is quite obvious that not all the people will agree with the necessity to implement this option. It may be particularly important to articulate the possible objects and refute them. For example, those in favor of other options would point out that the fact that a single company was able reduce its negative influence on the environment does not make much difference. Nevertheless, what these people tend to forget is that on a local level this makes a great difference. A possible objection to the positive impact on the morale might focus on the fact that the company can always hire new people and introduce new corporate culture. While it may certainly be an option, there is no doubts that such a solution is likely to be more costly than keeping the old workers and work together with them on improving the existing situation. Finally, some people might also note that if the third option is chosen, the interest of GSC is largely neglected. Indeed, it explicitly pointed out that it would like to see option one and option two implemented. What is more important is that it holds roughly a quarter of all the stock. It is true that twenty five percent of stock provide GSC with a considerable number of opportunities; however, if the other shareholders unite, they will always be able to come to an agreement and make a decision that would overcome the possible objection of GSC. Read More