Recent orders
External Business Environment
External Business Environment
Name
Institution
External Business Environment
A business does not exist alone. It exists within an environment where it engages in exchanges with its stakeholders. An internal business environment is those factors within the business that is responsible for its operations. These factors, and their influences, can be effectively controlled through proper stakeholder management. On the other hand, the external environment is those factors outside the control of management. It consists of political, economic, social, technological, ecological, and legal situations. For Knightsbridge firm, it has to analyze its industry-related opportunities and threats concerning each of these external environmental factors. Knightsbridge management has to be able to promptly manage the impact of the dynamic changes of the external environmental factors to stay afloat.
Australian legislation and regulations governing wealth management business have allowed Knightsbridge to expand its operations to other areas and increase the range of its services. Political instability and unfavorable industry-related legislation, however, may cause the business to fail. The global economic environment in which Knightsbridge operates has to be suitable. It has to consider the effect of the rise in inflation in Australia and other markets it intends to enter on its cost of operations. It also has to conform to the social norms of the community it operates within or otherwise risks losing its popularity and, consequently, its customers.
Knightsbridge management has to ensure it is keeping up with the dynamic technological advancements in investment management. To avoid losing its customers, it has to provide the best quality and newest products compared to its competitors. It also has to adapt to new and cost-effective ways of delivering its services and distributing its products to the market. Businesses are also expected to adopt sustainable business strategies. In the contemporary business environment, companies must manage pollution and espouse ethical practices. Knightsbridge has ensured it is socially responsible. Thus, it has mitigated the risk of losing the trust of its stakeholders.
In conclusion, a proper analysis of the external business environment is a requirement of each entity. Consequently, Knightbridge can forecast any external changes that might affect the wealth management industry. Since they cannot control the changes, they have a chance to mitigate the negative effect such changes may have on the business.
ethics policy and Declaration of Principles
Ethics Policy
[Student’s Name]
[Institution Affiliation]
Part One: Ethics PolicyThis paper is an ethics policy paper that denotes the worth of supporting and protecting the environment. For businesses to flourish, it must ensure that such policies are implemented effectively and extensively.Declaration of PrinciplesOver the years, most business owners, stakeholders, and the management amid employees have not yet considered the importance of saving the environment. The notion has been that the environment is all over and cannot be exhausted. This can be viewed as a negative approach towards the environment and especially the use of water, fuel and animals. For this reason, it is worth to note that various businesses have a negative attitude towards the environment they operate in. To be precise, such actions comes with different approaches towards protecting and undertaking advocacy to the businesses, as well as the business owners concerning the importance of the environment as a whole. It is unethical to waste water, fuel and violating animal right today and in the future (Hackett, 2010).On the other hand, it is also unethical for business especially industry to dispose of their waste products without treatment them to the environment. For example (water and energy). Such considerations draw the concern that there exist a thin line between what we can consider as ethical and unethical use of the environment, in this case, water and animals as the environment. The gap draws close when defining the environment and its consequences when it depleted. For businesses to comprehend this ethical policy, it is primarily vital to consider the effects that come as a result of not following the due procedures for protecting the environment. The environment is a primary ingredient for survival for both businesses and animals inclusive of the human race (Dangelico & Pujari, 2010). Therefore, in order to meet the current demands, consequently to that of the future, it is mandatory to for businesses to adjust their attitudes towards the environment.Guideline OneThis guideline informs businesses about two concerns that support the above declaration: the relationship that businesses have towards the water and the ethical treatment of the same. There exist an unbreakable relationship between business and water. This means that without the existence of safe water, then the business will not exist. Thus, all business from a sole proprietorship, companies, firms, among other types of businesses must adhere to an ethical treatment of water and its environs. Since water is a primary raw material for these businesses, the have a bigger role to play in its existence and maintenance. This can only be achieved if ethical treatment of water is met. Business should make sure that all its uses of water ought to be effective and reasonable. In addition, businesses should understand that it never ethical to pollute the water in any way and if such a situation happens. They should be legally responsible for their actions (such as treatment of polluted water and compensating the parties affected including animals and human beings)Guideline TwoThis guideline depicts the relationship between energy production businesses and their ethical legalities or frameworks. These businesses ought to facilitate the production of energy in ways that are environmental friendly. The societal environment that they serve must not have negative impacts due to the production of energy. It’s due time that businesses of this nature must adopt green energy such as solar energy, wind energy amid others that have zero percent negative impact on the society. Production of energy from fossil fuel is considered ethical, but this is limited to the various condition. First, the production should not interfere with the society or the environment it operates from. Secondly, fossil fuel should not be exhausted. However, not all methods of production are ethical. For example, off-shore drilling of fossil oil is considered an ethical as it affects the form of life of animals leaving in water. Energy operating businesses should reduce the gap when it comes to such unethical methods.Guideline ThreeThis is an animal right guideline. Businesses ought to understand that that animals have the same right as they do. Businesses in relation to animals should consider that it’s unethical to use animals in any form of profit making venture. In any case that animals are used, such as in marketing they should also directly benefit from the funds sourced as businesses enjoy. Animals should not be exploited in any form.Part Two: JudgmentsCase 1Judgment: Nestle practice is considered ethical. The practice is part of the solution as not the problem to the global water crisis.Supporting Evidence:This is because the company supports the society where it gets the water with corporate benefits via corporate social responsibility programs (Dangelico & Pujari, 2010).Supporting Reasons: Nestle exploits water as a natural resource is the best way possible not affecting the society.Case 2Judgment: Fracking is an unethical practice of getting fossil fuel.Supporting Evidence: This is because it leaves the lives of the people in danger so does the environment (Gillespie, 2014). The chemical injected underground is not only a risk today but also in the future.Supporting Reasons: The guidelines indicates that any negative impact as a result of the production of energy factors such practice as unethical.Case 3Judgment: Factory is farming it unethical. Animals’ rights should be adhered to the later.Supporting Evidence: The animals close packed together. This violates their right of movement. The use of chemicals to stimulate production and growth is also against their right hence why factory farming is unethical and should be banned (Hackett, 2010).Supporting Reasons: The declaration as well as the guideline indicate that it unethical to use animals as a profit business or venture.
References
Dangelico, R. M., & Pujari, D. (2010). Mainstreaming green product innovation: Why and how companies integrate environmental sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 471-486.
Gillespie, A. (2014). International Environmental Law, Policy, and Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Hackett, S. C. (2010). Environmental and natural resources economics: theory, policy, and the sustainable society. ME Sharpe.
Does Limiting Access to Guns Reduce Gun Violence (2)
Does Limiting Access to Guns Reduce Gun Violence
Student’s Name
Department of Affiliation
Course
Professor
Date
Does Limiting Access to Guns Reduce Gun Violence
Background
The United States is a country where millions of people own guns, and they can purchase these guns from several gun dealers spread around the country. While many laws guide the country’s acquisition of firearms, these laws vary from one state to another. These laws are more stringent in some states, while in other states, it is more lenient, and this gives people room to purchase guns without proper background checks to ascertain if they are fit to own guns. In many cases reported on the misuse of firearms in the country, it is clear that many people are taking advantage of the lacuna that exists in the laws set by some states on the acquisition of guns. They purchase the firearms and misuse them in other states that have more stringent laws. Although federal laws regulate gun ownership and gun use in the United States, the second amendment allows citizens to own guns. The federal government has given the states the autonomy to make their laws to regulate the ownership of firearms in their respective states. This is one of the law’s weaknesses that most people exploit and acquire guns in the country. There is also a significant percentage of private gun dealers in the country who sell guns online citizens, and this exhibits the weakness in the system where most people who purchase guns are not subjected to background checks. Most of them end up acquiring guns without following the due process.
Suicide and Homicide
A few decades ago, the records available in the United States Department of Justice indicated that the cases of suicides in the United States related to the use of a gun were reasonably average compared to other countries. Although most of them may have committed suicide using their guns, many observers intimate that most of these people used the gun because it was available and the easiest weapon to use. It is critical to note that in the same period, other countries that do not have many guns in civilians’ hands had the same suicide rates or slightly more than the United States. Many researchers who researched gun control in the early 1990s intimate that the cases of suicide in the United States have little or no relationship with the country’s gun policy. Many of them believe that the reason why many people in the country commit suicide is most likely the same reasons people in other countries commit suicide and not because of the availability of guns. However, the figures available in the United States Department of Justice in the last ten years seem to contradict the researchers’ views in the early 1990s. For example, in 2010, there were close to around twenty thousand suicides related to the use of firearms. Seven years later, the figures available in the Justice Department indicate that the suicide-related with the help of firearms were close to thirty thousand in 2017. These figures show a close relationship between gun ownership and the rising cases of suicide in the country. There have also been rising cases of homicide in the last few years. Although other factors may contribute to the increasing cases of homicides and suicides, like the mental health problem, it is clear that guns’ availability in civilians’ hands needs to be controlled (Riddell et al. 2018).
Mass Killings
Mass killing is not a new phenomenon in the United States. For example, in 1993, there was a massacre of innocent people in the Long Island Railroad, and this occurred again in 1999 in Columbine school. In both instances, many people lost their lives. Although some have a contrary opinion on why guns should be controlled in the country, it is clear that having guns in the hands of the wrong people is one of the most significant enablers that makes it possible for bad people to commit such crimes. In 2012, a man broke into a school and started shooting students, randomly killing twenty school children and six adults. In the same year, another mass shooting occurred in Colorado theatre, leaving many people dead. This instance could have been prevented if there were proper laws that guide how people in the country are issued with guns. Most of the people who commit such crimes are not mentally stable. The background check is one of the requirements that gun dealers must undertake before they can issue guns to civilians in the country.
However, the loose-ends in the laws that regulate the ownership and the use of firearms in the country has given most people the autonomy to acquire guns even when they are not fit to own guns. As noted earlier, mass shootings are not new in the United States, but the recent statistics indicate that there have been many reported cases of mass shootings in the country. These reports demonstrate that the country needs to look at the laws that regulate the acquisition of firearms in the country. Most of the mass shootings in the country have been due to people owning guns that have high capacity magazines. Therefore, these laws must be re-looked. The necessary adjustment should be made to ensure that the lives of innocent people in the country are protected and their safety is guaranteed. The increasing cases of homicide, suicide, and the mass shooting in the country indicate a broken link in the law that regulates the ownership and the use of guns in the country (Paradice , 2017).
References
Riddell, C. A., Harper, S., Cerdá, M., & Kaufman, J. S. (2018). Comparison of rates of firearm and nonfirearm homicide and suicide in black and white non-Hispanic men, by US state. Annals of Internal Medicine, 168(10), 712-720.
Paradice, D. (2017). An analysis of US school shooting data (1840–2015). Education, 138(2), 135-144.