这个问题的答案很重要,不只是为了奖励它们吹嘘自己的历史。比一比20世纪美国资本主义或慈善资本主义 那些巨头公司的记录,有助于理解一个今天被热烈讨论的问题:慈善事业或企业哪一个在借用那本庆祝IBM百年生日的书名使世界运行得更好的方面更有效?
The comparison can also help answer an old question about the proper role of business insociety. Many people would agree with Milton Friedmans view that the only social responsibilityof business is to increase its profits. But Michael Porter, a management guru, recentlycaused a stir by arguing that firms should seek instead to create shared value thatsimultaneously benefits both the firm and society. Andrew Carnegie would have sharedFriedmans view of business, saving the philanthropy until after the money has been made.IBM, at least after Thomas Watson senior took charge in 1914, has arguably been a case studyin how to create shared value, both through its formalised giving, which is among the mostgenerous in corporate America, but more fundamentally through its everyday business.
这样的比较还能回答一个古老的问题,有关企业在社会中扮演的适当角色。米尔顿??弗里德曼认为企业唯一的社会责任是提高它的利润,很多人都同意这个看法。但是最近管理大师迈克??波特却提出公司应该寻求而不是创造同时对自己和社会都有利的共享价值,这一论点引起了一番争议。卡耐基会同意弗里德曼对商业的看法,在挣到钱以后再做慈善。而IBM、至少在老托马斯??沃森于1914年掌舵后的IBM是一个可以论证如何创造共享价值的案例,既通过一定形式的捐献个角度看它属于最慷慨的国公司之一更根本地是通过平时的生意。
【2015考研英语阅读IBM vs 卡耐基基金会】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30