Tourism and Hospitality Comparison - Essay Example

TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY COMPARISM Introduction The term tourism refers both to the travel undertaken for pleasure and recreation. A tourism tip may involve pleasure visits to see fascinating and historical sites or even museums. Provided there cater for the pleasure or recreational needs of the people tourism from the ancient times in the area of mass tourism is a relatively modern trend, although travelers have reacted as tourists, regardless of the reason for their journey, since history was recorded. While hospitality companies are actually therefore for the treatment of the people such as accommodation, food etc. hospitality services is also referred to as accommodation sharing, it is associated mostly with travelers and tourists staying with one another. Tourism is a new paradigm or entrepreneur development that takes into account tourism as an investment, that improves competitiveness but with greater sensitivity towards social actions and the environment. Sustainability and tourism are in fact two sides of the same coin. They are the results of favoring the best economic results, the best benefits and the best social and environmental impacts to generate development, growth and social well being. The social responsibility of tourism must be contemplated from two main perspectives. From the public sector, tourism is contemplated as a multiplying effect, as a generator of wealth and well being, and concern resolves arou8nd the difficulty that developing countries could have in defending their scenario of development in the industrial area, as tourism is where there is a great source of progress. Corporate social responsibility Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a concept whereby organizations consider the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact to their achievements on consumers, employees, shareholders, communities and the environment in all aspects of their operations. This obligation is seen to extend beyond the statutory obligation to comply with legislation and sees organizations voluntarily taking further steps to improve the quality of life for employees and their families as well as for the local community and society at large. According to Milton Friedman there is one and only one social responsibility of business to use its resources and engage in achievements designed to increase its profits as long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engage in open and free competition without deception or fraud. One part of social responsibility is being responsible to people, for the actions of people, and for actions that affect people. Social responsibility is about holding a group, organization or company accountable for its effect on the people around it. People within the company, people working with the company, the community the company is in and those who buy from the company. The idea of being responsible to customers has actually long been imbedded in the ethics of business. The idea of treating a customer with respect and attention is not new particularly in sales and commission based work. What is new is the idea that it's not to profit from the customer, but to genuinely care about what the customer wants and needs. Accountability for people inside a company is something new. Many times when a scandal or irresponsible behavior comes to light in the corporate world the company and those involved often try to distance themselves as much as possible. Cover ups, buy offs and "golden parachutes" all fall under this behavior. Social responsibility would nearly be the opposite of what goes on in the business world today - a company taking the blame and doing what is needed to fix the problem rather than committing more crimes to cover up the first one. Ethics Ethics is a major branch of philosophy is a study of values and customs of a person or group. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right and wrong, good and evil and responsibilities. Ethics are generally perceived as a set of social standards that encompasses the norms of the community for many in the Western societies, ethical and moral behavior is based upon Christian technique, the principles being the 10 commandments. This standard then becomes the established guideline by which all action is judged. Moral standards developed by a community are useful to the extend that they defines a set of acceptable values as they apply to the majority. These standards are usually found in the form of laws. Laws are necessary to help guide a community as a whole law strive to ensure farness and to assess guilt (and punishment) based upon generally accepted principles of behavior. Communities determine the way in which people will live together as par of a collective group. As the group grows and charges, moral standards may also change. These standards come from the group mindset of the majority. As such, the majority has an obligation to allow for rational actions taken on the part of members of the majority. The rights of the majority are to be enforced only to the extent that they do not infringe upon the rights of the majority. In a nutshell, ethics are personal set of values used by an individual to guide heir actions, and to recognize any obligation. Ethics are not objectives, but are subjective to the individual. Ethics are a continuously evolving code of conduct dependent upon circumstances and the life experiences of the individual. Individual is the most important component to be used when discussing ethics are relative to our perception of reality, and are based upon a specific point of view. As such, ethics are not a natural set of values. If this were true, except in the cases of abhorrent behavior, we as human being would. Operate on a more animalistic level. For example, wolves instinctively care for their young and injured. They work as a cooperative group for the good of the pack. If one wolf acts in a manner determinable to the pack, it is driven away by the other. For the wolves, their moral code is a fundamental part of their nature. Ethics are re-interrupted at times of crises or an internalized change. This happens because a viewpoint has been shown to be inaccurate or when the beliefs fail to take into consideration a very specific set of circumstances. At such times, the individual should rationally view their beliefs, and make internal inquires as to the experiences that produced them. Reflection is needed to determine if a new set of values is necessary, or if existing values need only be modified to reflect the situation. Ethics should not be followed blindly nor should societal morals dictate the ethical norms for all individuals. For instance where this has happened, the masses have blindly followed like sheep's but ethics should not intrude upon the private lives of their individuals who are not harming anyone. BUSINESS ETHICS As recently as decade ago, many companies viewed business ethics only in terms of administrate with legal standards and adherence to internal rules and regulations. Today the situation is different, business ethics in on the rise across the world and many companies realize that in order to succeed and earn the respect and confidence of their customers, like never before, corporations are being asked and provided to improve their business practices to emphasize legal and ethical behavior companies and professional firs and individuals alike are being held increasingly accountable for their actions, grows for higher standards of corporate social responsibility. Business can use ethical decision making to secure their businesses is by making decisions that allow for government agencies to minimize their involvement with the corporation. Kaliski, 2001 For instance if a company is proactive and follows the EPA guidelines for admissions on dangerous pollutants and even goes an extra step to get involved in the community and address those concerns that the public might have; they would be less likely to have the EPA investigate them for environmental concerns. "A significant element of current thinking about privacy, however, stresses "self-regulation" rather than market or government mechanisms for protecting personal information" Fialka, 2006. Most rules and regulations are formed due to public outcry, if there is not outcry there often will be limited regulation. If we take a look at business ethics as a whole and how those individual decisions within a company are made we can gain a better understanding of how socially responsible ethics works within the context of human responsibility. First most (at least half) of all corporations base their decision making off of the company's code of ethics. Kaliski, 2007 this ethical code allows for business managers to have a outline to bring forth their decisions from. The code of ethics is just a starting point within the company, a tool to be used by CEOs to help guide employees when they are faced with ethical dilemmas. There are always three factors that we can confront in facing an ethical dilemma. (Pride, Hughes, and Kapoor, 2008) The first factor is the individual factor or what decision we might make ethical when we are left to our own judgment, the next is the social factor or the decision that we might make with social reasoning interjected and the last being the opportunity factor. "There is no way that all situations that involve ethical decision making an organization can be addressed in a code. Codes of ethics must be monitored continually to determine whether they are comprehensive and usable guidelines for making ethical business decisions. "Kaliski, 2007 When it comes to the actual decision process in the human responsibility part of socially responsible ethics there are many other factors that can be used to make ethical decisions. Kaliski, 2007 For instance there are several areas that a manger could point an employee to outside a code of ethics to assist them with making an ethical decision. Some of them are: The Golden Rule: Act in a way you would want others to act toward you. The utilitarian principle: Act in a way those results in the greatest good for the greatest number. Kant's categorical imperative: Act in such a way that the action taken under the circumstances could be a universal law, or rule, of behavior. The professional ethic: Take actions that would be viewed as proper by a disinterested panel of professional peers. The TV test: Always ask, "Would I feel comfortable explaining to a national TV audience why I took this action" The legal test: Ask whether the proposed action or decision is legal. Established laws are generally considered minimum standards for ethics. The four-way test: Ask whether you can answer "yes" to the following questions as they relate to the decision: Is the decision truthful Is it fair to all concerned Will it build goodwill and better friendships Will it be beneficial to all concerned" Kaliski, 2007. All of these can help to guide an employee when the code of ethics is lacking or simply when the code does not cover all areas that an employee might run into. These factors come into what is needed to explain human responsibility part of socially responsible ethics. Stakeholders No one would dispute that life in most business organizations was much simpler in years gone by. In reality, it was a less complex period, with minimal and clearly understood expectations among the various parties (investors who put up the money to start or finance the business, owners and their employees who needed to get and keep the business running, suppliers to make the raw materials available for production, and customers who purchased the product or services). Organizations face a much more complex state of affairs in today's society. The recognition by the public, or society, that today's business organization has evolved to the point where it is no longer the sole property or interest of the founder, the founder's family, or even a group of owner-investors has been a principal driving force behind this societal transformation. Today's modern organization in many instances is the institutional centerpiece of a complex society made up of many people with a multitude of interests, expectations, and demands as to what organizations ought to provide. As discussed in more detail later in this chapter and in Chapter 11, the social contract between organizations and various parties has continually changed. Organizations that have been able to survive and thrive have found ways to respond to ever-changing expectations. These organizations have had to meet many assorted Benefits of CSR Corporate Social Responsibility is not just about doing the right thing. It also offers direct business benefits: Building a reputation as a responsible business sets you apart. Many consumers prefer to buy from ethical business. Companies often favor suppliers who demonstrate responsible policies as this helps them to minimize the risk of any damage to their own reputations. Below are the benefits: 1. Reducing waste and emissions doesn't just help the environment, it saves you money too. It's not difficult to cut utility bills and waste disposal costs, bringing immediate cash benefits. 2. A good reputation makes it easier to recruit employees. 3. Employees stay longer, reducing the costs and disruption of recruitment and retaining. 4. Employees are better motivated and as well they are productive. 5. CSR helps ensure you comply with regulatory requirements. 6. Activates such as involvement with the local community are ideal opportunities to generate positive press coverage. 7. Good relationships with local authorities make doing business easier. Understanding the wider impact of your business can help you think up profitable new products and services. 8. CSR can make you more competitive and reduce the risks of sudden damage to your reputation. Investors reorganize this and are more willing to finance you. Benefits might include better alignment with consumer concerns, partnership opportunities with TNCs, improvements in productivity and improved capacity for learning and innovation. However, these benefits will not be significant for every company. In the case of SMEs in developing countries, upgrading the quality of their technology, management, and marketing, are likely to be equally pressing concerns, which need to be addressed in parallel with social and environmental impacts. CSR boosters in the form of donor led initiatives to promote SME-CSR would be misplaced except in industries and sectors where a clear business case can be demonstrated. In industries and sectors where a real business case is not yet apparent, it is more useful to work to strengthen the business case drivers. COST To comply fully with CRS standards, there are significant cost to both the administrative burden and external auditing and certification. Independent auditors can be expensive, particularly where they involve international professional service firms. This is sometimes paid for by the buying company as with corporate codes of conduct and sometimes by the manufacturer as with certification systems where firms are producing for a number of companies, each with their own social and environmental criteria, this can increase the cost of CSR. Pressure of greater CSR whether focusing on environmental, consumer or human right issues often shares the common underlying issues concern that corporate influence is too great. The key concern is that CSR standards will act as a protectionist mechanism for retaining jobs, trade and investment in developed countries. The focus of issues and standards often reflects the concerns and priorities of consumers as well as prevailing technologies and best practice in the countries where they were developed. The burden of monitoring and certification itself can be a significant expense, effectively barring developing country SMEs from some markets. Lack of access to technology, environmentally friendly materials, credit, information and training, can act as barriers to social and environmental improvements. Even when they are able to make improvements, CSR lack the valuable direct relationships with consumers, which would enable them to reap reputation benefits. Conclusion The past twenty years have seen a radical change in the relationship between business and society. Key drivers of this change have been the globalization of trade, the increased size and influence of companies, the repositioning of government and the rise in strategic importance of stakeholder relationships, knowledge and brand reputation. The relationship between companies and civil society organizations has moved on from paternalistic philanthropy to a re-examination of the roles, rights and responsibilities of business in society. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), defined in terms of the responsiveness of businesses to stakeholders' legal, ethical, social and environmental expectations, is one outcome of these developments Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a process that has been driven by globalization, deregulation and privatization. For Trans National Corporations (TNCs) it is an outcome of public pressure arising from their operations in developing countries in relation to human rights, environmental pollution and labor issues. CSR is now being discussed and debated in the public policy sphere - the UK has a Minister for Corporate Social Responsibility. After looking at the current state and future directions of CSR globally, and the implications of CSR in hospitality and tourism, the "business case" question is one of many dealt with in the study when proposing "strategies in responding to the demands of CSR", and "CSR approaches that support the role of small businesses in development. References Carbon Footprint, 2006. Carbon Footprint's Business Services. Retrieved October 19, 2007,http://www.carbonfootprint.com/companies_calc.html Hogue, J 2001, April 19, Johnson and Johnson Tylenol Scare. Retrieved September 10, 2007: http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/spring01/Hogue/tylenol.html Kaliski, B. (Ed.). Social Responsibility and Organizational Ethics. 2001, Encyclopedia of Business and Finance 2nd ed., Vol. 1. New York. Kaliski, B. (Ed.). Ethics in Management. 2001. Encyclopedia of Business and Finance. 2nd ed., Vol. 1. New York. Fialka.J.2006. Political & Economic: Big Business Have New Take On Warning: Some Companies more from opposition to offering proposals on limiting Emissions. Wall street Journal. pgA.4 Bansal, P. Roth, R. 2000., Why Companies Go Green: A Model of Ecological Responsiveness. The Academy of Management Journal, Vol.43, NO.4, PG 717-736 Bulkeley, H.2001. Governing Climate Change: The politics and Risk Society. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographer, New series, vol 26, no4, pp430-447. http://www.icaew.com/index.cfmroute=12763 https://www.unido.org/doc/5127 Read More