Challenges in the Business Environment

Overview
Changing, or even stating, a company’s values can be a long and arduous process, but it often pales in comparison to the effort it takes to make sure they are honored, implemented and projected. In this assignment, you evaluate how well your chosen company from the first assignment has done in “walking the talk” and responding to a social issue.
Preparation
Review your chosen company’s (GE) mission and values statements as well as other sources that provide insight into the company’s values with regard to social responsibility. Pick two of their primary values and research how the company manifests those values. Simple examples might be the commitment to workplace diversity or ecological sustainability.
Instructions
Create a 3–5-minute (approximately 6–8 slides) PowerPoint presentation that evaluates how well the company embodies its issue-related values. Your presentation should contain detailed speaker’s notes that flesh out and support main points, ideas, or conclusions and have supporting citations.
1. Summarize your chosen company’s Supplier Responsibility information.
2. In your own words, explain how each aspect of your Supplier Code of Conduct is committed to ethical business practices and social responsibility.
3. Discuss your company’s stance on each of the following areas:
o Empowering Workers.
o Labor and Human Rights.
o Health and Safety.
o The Environment.
o Accountability.
4. Identify the key ways that your company’s Code of Conduct has changed since last year.
5. Examine the manner in which your company’s Supplier Code of Conduct helps the organization operate as a socially responsible organization.
6. In this week’s discussion, you consider assembling a team to write a supplier code of conduct. Recommend the stakeholders roles (4–5) needed on the team and how each supports the project.
Integrate at least three supporting resources from the Strayer University Library or other reputable sources.
This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards. For assistance and information, please refer to the Strayer Writing Standards link in the left-hand menu of your course. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is:
• Create a presentation about the key areas, changes, and progress in a company’s supplier responsibilities and code of conduct.

 

 

Sample Solution

ar. Nevertheless, it can be seen above that jus ad bellum can be debated throughout, showing that there is no definitive theory of a just war, as it is normatively theorised.

The second section begins deciphering jus in bello or what actions can we classify as permissible in just wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 323).

First, it is never just to intentionally kill innocent people in wars, supported by Vittola’s first proposition. This is widely accepted as ‘all people have a right not to be killed’ and if a soldier does, they have violated that right and lost their right. This is further supported by “non-combatant immunity” (Frowe (2011), Page 151), which leads to the question of combatant qualification mentioned later in the essay. This is corroborated by the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, ending the Second World War, where millions were intently killed, just to secure the aim of war. However, sometimes civilians are accidentally killed through wars to achieve their goal of peace and security. This is supported by Vittola, who implies proportionality again to justify action: ‘care must be taken where evil doesn’t outweigh the possible benefits (Begby et al (2006b), Page 325).’ This is further supported by Frowe who explains it is lawful to unintentionally kill, whenever the combatant has full knowledge of his actions and seeks to complete his aim, but it would come at a cost. However, this does not hide the fact the unintended still killed innocent people, showing immorality in their actions. Thus, it depends again on proportionality as Thomson argues (Frowe (2011), Page 141).

This leads to question of what qualifies to be a combatant, and whether it is lawful to kill each other as combatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.