James Posts theory of global corporate citizenship - Essay Example

16 Apr. Critical analysis of James Post’s theory of global corporate citizenship: “Global corporate citizenship means that companies must not only be engaged with stakeholders but be stakeholders themselves alongside governments and civil society” (Schwab). James Post rightly considers companies as stakeholders of the world. This can be estimated from the fact that the recent economic recession that has blanketed the whole world has caused a considerable damage to the business scenario. A lot of companies have downsized in order to save their expenses resulting into increased unemployment.

Many people have lost their jobs in the recent years. This proves the fact that companies are stakeholders to the globe. Do you believe businesses have a moral obligation to integrate public work into their private work, or treat their private work as public work? Yes, businesses do have a moral obligation of integrating public work into the private work. As James Post rightly emphasizes, it is in the self interest of management not to be an entirely private good. Managers can enhance the life and profitability of their business by working for the achievement of societal commonwealth because this way, they will gain the consent and encouragement of the stakeholders in the society.

Where managers adopt such practices which are not directed at addressing a truly public concern, and where managers’ skills are treated as a totally private property, the business does not have many golden days and the continuity of business is threatened by social forces. In the present age, people have become increasingly conscious about the environmental impacts of businesses. Although the business may be private, but such public concerns as environmental protection must be taken due care of in order to make the development sustainable and protect the environment.

Do you believe that the distinction between work and life, and private work and public work, is artificial? No, the distinction between work and life, and private work and public work is not artificial. It is real. In order to spend a happy and healthy life, an individual is supposed to maintain balance between his/her work and life at home. People normally refer to work as their duty and associate life with the time they spend with their family and/or friends. In this context, work and life have to be clearly distinguished from each other.

In the workplace, an individual is dutiful to the employers whereas in the personal life, an individual is dutiful to his/her family as well as to the society. The distinction between the public work and private work is indeed, artificial. Critics may argue that public works are generally controlled by the government and all laws formulated by the government apply on them. On the other hand, private work is owned by citizens and they are leveraged in that they do not have to comply with the work related standards that are imposed in the public works.

However, this is not actually true! In light of the argument made by James Post, the private work is affected by the public, and therefore needs to take public concerns into consideration. The practices adopted by public works control various factors in the society like crime rate, education and the politics. Practices in the public works need to be adjusted according to the changes in the socioeconomic and political scenario induced by public works. For example, when the crime rate becomes high as a result of faulty practices in public works, managers in public works need to provide their employees with added protection and security.

Works Cited: Schwab, Klaus. “Global Corporate Citizenship.” 2008. Web. 16 Apr. 2011.