Model Individual Winning Business Proposal for the Homeland Plastics Case

Model Individual Winning Business Proposal for the Homeland Plastics Case

Author’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Model Individual Winning Business Proposal for the Homeland Plastics Case

To: Project Manager Date: April 27, 2012

From: [Student Name],

Re: Proposal; Homeland Plastics should suspend its operations in Ramina

Background. As a result of the concerns raised in regard to environmental issues relating to Homeland Plastics, it is essential to appreciate that it is a universally accepted foundational concept of business that the primary principle of Homeland Plastics is to maximize profits. Although, there is nothing erroneous with profits maximization, the unceasing pressure for maximum profits may create several ethical problems for Homeland Plastics’ operations in Ramina.

Proposal. Taking into consideration the ethical issues, I suggest that Homeland Plastics suspend operations until it complies with the water emissions guidelines established by Finland’s Ministry of the Environment (MEF). On the other hand, the alternative would be to relocate to Vyborg, where the established water emissions guidelines are less stringent. However, taking into consideration the cost of doing business between the two locations, I hereby propose that Homeland Plastics relocates to Vyborg.

Reasoning. I hereby suggest that, in the best interest of Homeland Plastics, it would be more appropriate to comply with water emissions guidelines established in Ramina. This would however, bring about the issue of business ethics. Business ethics may be largely extraneous for the majority of managers, since it fails to offer any convenient advice. On the other hand, as a chemical engineer, I am of the opinion that moral philosophy, has a propensity to value altruism, the concept that an individual ought to do good, since it is appropriate, or will be of advantage to others, but not since the individual will profit from it. Homeland Plastics is duty bound to protect the environment it operates in, but on the contrary, business ethics may conflict with profit maximization. From a business ethics perspective, externalities permit companies such as Homeland Plastics to contaminate environmental habitat or result in human heath concerns. It ought to be comprehensible that if an externality causes harm to the environment or harms a person, then that externality is an obvious infringement of ethics. However, a number of senior managers in Homeland Plastics may not appreciate the ethical repercussions of the externalities and ecological damage. While all stakeholders in this issue realize Homeland Plastics is rather of a black box in this proposal, the consequence is still an awkward blurring of the confines between the profit maximization, and the quest of self-interest. For instance, the confines between altruism and self-interest, interests and ethics, economic realities and ethical demands, financial and moral costs, and ethical imperatives and profit motives are not readily distinct at Homeland Plastic’s case.

On the other hand, Homeland Plastics’ senior management is bound by fiduciary responsibility.  Fiduciary responsibility in this regard applies to the responsibilities of Homeland Plastics corporate directors to implement the best interests of the company. If the directors of Homeland Plastics construe this mandate narrowly, then there would be a short-range focus on profits that would ultimately harm both the business and society. The unevenness arises from the reality that profit maximization is obliquely justified. It is constructive to note that this predicament is one that business ethics would share with legal principles.

The best next steps: It is essential to note that, the concern with competitive markets that Homeland Plastics engages in, and the market-clearing prices, is not merely an abstract, philosophical hypothesis concerning what may justify the drive for profit-maximization. The whole legal structure of Homeland Plastics, in conjunction with the pertinent regulatory environment, should be organized in a way that would promote competition, as well as the exact category of competition that is liable to produce market-clearing prices.