A Critical Analysis of Company Q’s Social Responsibility Essay

AbstractThis essay is a critical analysis of the go throughs that order Q has show with regard to societal responsibility. In essence, union Qs behaviors, while mediocre reactions to maintain financial viability and avoid contribution to employee malfeasance, actually demonstrate a profound solicitude that results in a negative public shape that bequeath end up priceing it more in the want term. I ordain hold out solutions that will provide a cost savings while slide bying Company Q from making further humbling errors.A Critical Analysis of Company Qs Social stateUnfortunately, Company Q has non made wise decisions as it relates to social responsibility. in that location argon reports that the caller-out 1) chose to c move back much-needed grocery interjects in economically low-spirited (read minority-occupied) parts of town, 2.) chose to start going health-conscious solid feed items only after it could set the highest-margin products it could find and 3) asha medly refused to provide day-old food to the local food bank under the auspices that it was concerned that its employees would steal the food kind of of donating it. The goal of this analysis is not only to highlight this absurd behavior and reasoning but also to offer solutions that are conducive to see social-responsibility concerns and maintaining financial viability. With any hope, Company Q will heed the counsel and imbed immediate changes.Scenario 1The news recently reported the shuttering of two of Company Qs grocery stores in Neighborhood A and Neighborhood B. Although the company gave no public statement about the nature of these closings, public financial disclosures indicate the rationale The stores were not doughable. Of course, in a free- marketplace economy, companies have the survival of the fittest to close unprofitable stores. But in addition to being a free market, we are also an economy that operates on high social principlesor, at the very least, we shou ld be. Company Q apparently missed this memorandum when it was direct 30 years ago. With these stores removed from both neighborhoods, where are the residents of those neighborhoods supposed to buy at? And with the removal of the stores, what impetus do the few other grocers have to keep prices reasonable for people of that socio-economic level?Scenario 1 closingI recognize that a possible refuter to any of the aforementioned questions is, If the residents are not shopping there and putting property into the store, why would we be anticipate to stay open? I would offer that such a rebuttal is wrongheaded. Perhaps a better question may be, What are we doing to elbow grease residents to shop elsewhere or to not spend more money with us? Does Company Q offer the food choices these residents want? Is the layout of your stores conducive to these residents? ar the prices too high? Do the staff you employ in these stores look like the residents who shop there? If the answer is no t o any of these questions, we will have unlocked one of umpteen possible reasons why the store is unprofitable. It is then Company Qs responsibility to address these issues instead of backpacking up shop and moving to the more affluent areas of town, where they are not concerned that a jar of pickles may cost $40.Scenario 2With a weight epidemic ravaging the country, Company Q made its decision to offer health-conscious food fare only after it could find the foods that provided the highest margin of profit for it. That is credibly why there is a dearth of health-food options in its store, and probably why the prices are nearly twice those of its competitors. This message translates to the community as If Company X give notice profit obscenely from offering health-food options to its consumers, it will then be concerned with offering vigorous options. Otherwise, let the American corpulency epidemic rage on unfetterednot our problemScenario 2ResolutionThe above message is a clear problem, and it does not have to be. It is possible for Company Q to offer plenty of health-food options while inactive making a profit, though the profit may not be as obscene as the one it is currently making. Company Q can engage in more impactful negotiations with its suppliers or can shop the market for health-food competitors who would be willing to supply its sizable consumer base with its food. In our preceding(prenominal) reference to store closings, Company Q could also offer more health-food options in more of its stores as opposed to select ones. Or Company Q could offer the same food products but initially make less of a profit on it by offering discounts on it initially as a sort of enticement to customers to become interested and promote the food to their network of friends and family. This possibility could theoretically create increased demand for the healthy food and allow more profitability for the company in the considerable run. Company profitability and meeting social-responsibility obligations as it relates to our countrys obesity epidemic need not be at variance.Scenario 3A local food bankone that serves the indigentrequested the grant of day-old food from Company Q, but Company Q responded that it was concerned that it would lose revenue because it was concerned that its employees would purloin the food instead of donating it.Scenario 3ResolutionThis resolution is insulting to its own employees and to the food bank. If Company Q is concerned that its employees are miscreants, the companys bigger concern should be the integrity of its employee-verification process. at that place are many solutions available have the food-bank employees collect the food themselves, argue a specific employee to handle food shares, make a tax-deductible donation in the amount of the destroyed food instead. Almost any response is better than what Company Q provided.ConclusionThere is no question that both company has a right to pursue profits, and I recognize that Company Q is ultimately attempting to do just that. However, it is imperative that Company Q realize that it has a responsibility to contribute to club something other than products and services. Consumers are interested in doing business with forward-thinking companies who recognize their responsibility in propelling the soul of our society forward. With the counsel provided, Company Q can bring itself in line with many other companies in being truly customer centric.