>
Ethics and business/aide
Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais || En basEthics and business/aide
Message de edbdx posté le 10-06-2016 à 19:29:07 (S | E | F)
Bonjour à tous
J'ai eu le sujet suivant : "Doing business can never be ethical ? Discuss." J'ai eu une très mauvaise note avec pour seule correction dans la marge des "?". J'aimerais donc comprendre davantage... Je ne pense pas qu'il y ait beaucoup de fautes, cela doit se jouer sur le sens des mots...
Merci d'avance !
How can we strike a balance between having a high profitability in business and guaranteeing social values ? Gone are the days when we only cared about turnover, notably in developed countries with a middle-class. Modern Time by Chaplin is no more valuable : today managers do their best to ensure social values to their employees. A company such as Mr. Teeshirt is the embodiment of this, it manages its production and employees well, it accepts disabled, the elderly and fosters working groups.
However, in emerging countries this seems totally different, let alone (=not to mentioned ?) worldwide finance which keeps trying to have increasingly high incomes. Samsung which is a Korean firm has experienced thousand of claims concerning security.
Ethic is not always compatible with business. Whereas new star-ups often do this, multinational don’t. If it's the case, we have to look at the big picture and try to see te reason for companies acting this way. Indeed, Benetton use their ads in order to fight against racism. The main reason for those rebellions is getting in touch with new markets, getting more consumers (those which are yet aware of ethical values). Most of the time businessman rely on ethical values to have higher profitability. And that's certainly the only way to survive while competition is rocketing thanks to globalization, and while consumers want to improve their social values. Indeed, if businessman do not respect ethic values such as sustainability, they have to pay taxes : Wal-Mart had to pay 85 millions because it didn't manage its garbages well.
In the long run, we see that doing business can not truly be ethical. At least, it is definitely not widely recognized because most of economic actors don’t have « sufficient » development. Business just fits to new trends (sustainability, fair trades, aware and powerful consumers…) and new needs. Debate is yet about the ethical issue, but before it was about growth and construction, tomorrow it will concern robotic.
-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 10-06-2016 22:30
Message de edbdx posté le 10-06-2016 à 19:29:07 (S | E | F)
Bonjour à tous
J'ai eu le sujet suivant : "Doing business can never be ethical ? Discuss." J'ai eu une très mauvaise note avec pour seule correction dans la marge des "?". J'aimerais donc comprendre davantage... Je ne pense pas qu'il y ait beaucoup de fautes, cela doit se jouer sur le sens des mots...
Merci d'avance !
How can we strike a balance between having a high profitability in business and guaranteeing social values ? Gone are the days when we only cared about turnover, notably in developed countries with a middle-class. Modern Time by Chaplin is no more valuable : today managers do their best to ensure social values to their employees. A company such as Mr. Teeshirt is the embodiment of this, it manages its production and employees well, it accepts disabled, the elderly and fosters working groups.
However, in emerging countries this seems totally different, let alone (=not to mentioned ?) worldwide finance which keeps trying to have increasingly high incomes. Samsung which is a Korean firm has experienced thousand of claims concerning security.
Ethic is not always compatible with business. Whereas new star-ups often do this, multinational don’t. If it's the case, we have to look at the big picture and try to see te reason for companies acting this way. Indeed, Benetton use their ads in order to fight against racism. The main reason for those rebellions is getting in touch with new markets, getting more consumers (those which are yet aware of ethical values). Most of the time businessman rely on ethical values to have higher profitability. And that's certainly the only way to survive while competition is rocketing thanks to globalization, and while consumers want to improve their social values. Indeed, if businessman do not respect ethic values such as sustainability, they have to pay taxes : Wal-Mart had to pay 85 millions because it didn't manage its garbages well.
In the long run, we see that doing business can not truly be ethical. At least, it is definitely not widely recognized because most of economic actors don’t have « sufficient » development. Business just fits to new trends (sustainability, fair trades, aware and powerful consumers…) and new needs. Debate is yet about the ethical issue, but before it was about growth and construction, tomorrow it will concern robotic.
-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 10-06-2016 22:30
Réponse: Ethics and business/aide de here4u, postée le 11-06-2016 à 13:11:22 (S | E)
hello !
Attention ! une mauvaise note peut s'expliquer de plusieurs manières, en fonction de ce qui a été étudié avant et donc de ce qui est "attendu" par le professeur. Corriger n'est pas mettre "la bonne solution" (il peut y en avoir plusieurs, mais indiquer la nature de la faute pour que l'apprenant puisse corriger lui-même ! C'est ce que je vais essayer de faire, tout en étant incapable de juger si vous êtes bien dans le "cadre" de ce qui a été étudié au préalable ...
How can we strike a balance between having a high profitability in business and guaranteeing social values ? Gone are the days when we only cared about turnover, notably in developed countries with a middle-class (tout ceci est "grammaticalement correct, mais pas très clair et un peu emphatique). Modern Time(titre inexact) by Chaplin is no more valuable
: today managers do their best to ensure social values to their employees. A company such as Mr. Teeshirt is the embodiment of this(very clumsy), it manages its production and employees well, it accepts disabled (soit "disabled people" soit "the disabled"), the elderly and fosters(ici, le verbe aurait besoin de reprendre le sujet car sinon, il est mis sur le même plan que tous les noms précédents) working groups.However, in emerging countries this seems totally different, let alone (= not to mentioned ?) worldwide finance which keeps trying to have increasingly high incomes. Samsung which is a Korean firm has experienced thousand (gr)of claims concerning security.
Ethic = voc. is not always compatible with business. Whereas(Revoir la construction) new star-ups often do this, multinational don’t. If it's the case, we have to look at the big picture
(what do you mean?) and try to see tHe reason for companies acting this wayconstruction). Indeed, Benetton use their ads in order to fight against racism. The main reason for those rebellions is getting in touch with new markets, getting more consumers (those which are yet aware of ethical values)(If I understand well you're dealing with an aim....= construction) Most of the time businessman rely on ethical values to have higher profitability. And that's certainly the only way to survive while competition is rocketing thanks to globalization, and while consumers want to improve their social values. Indeed, if businessman do??? (une généralisation utilise le pluriel!) not respect ethic values such as sustainability, they (Who's "they"? Do you mean "companies"?)have to pay taxes : Wal-Mart had to pay 85 millions= gr + donner l'unité ! because it didn't manage its garbages well.In the long run, we see that doing business can not truly be ethical. At least, it is definitely not widely recognized
(not clear at all!) because most of economic actors = gr.don’t have « sufficient » development. Business just fits to new trends (sustainability, fair trades, aware and powerful consumers…) and new needs. XXX Debate is yet about the ethical issue, but before it was (employer used to)about growth and construction, tomorrow it will concern robotic.J'ajouterai que la plan n'est ni clair, ni idéal ...et que la réponse à la question n'est pas nette ...
Réponse: Ethics and business/aide de edbdx, postée le 11-06-2016 à 21:00:47 (S | E)
Bonjour Here4U ! Merci pour ta réponse, elle m'a déjà beaucoup aidé à comprendre mes erreurs ! J'ai décidé donc de les reprendre un maximum bien que je n'ai compris ce que signifiait "gr." ? Voici donc le texte ci-dessous. De plus, étant donné que le plan n'était pas pertinent, j'ai décidé de reprendre mon essai dans sa globalité, j'en insère donc un supplémentaire qui j'espère sera plus efficace. Merci beaucoup !
How can we strike a balance between having a high profitability in business and guaranteeing social values ? Gone are the days when we only cared about turnover, notably in developed countries with a middle-class. Modern Times by Chaplin is no more valid : today managers do their best to ensure social values to their employees. A company such as Mr. Teeshirt manages its production and employees well, it accepts the disabled, the elderly and it fosters working groups.
However, in emerging countries this seems totally different, let alone worldwide finance which keeps trying to have increasingly high incomes. Samsung which is a Korean firm has experienced thousand (gr)of claims concerning security.
Morality is not always compatible with business. New star-ups often do this, whereas multinational don’t. If it's the case, we have to look at the big picture (I think it has the same meaning as « to step back » ) and try to see the reason for companies to act this way. Indeed, Benetton use their ads in order to fight against racism. The main reason for those rebellions is getting in touch with new markets, attracting more consumers (those which are yet aware of ethical values.) Most of the time businessman relies on ethical values to have higher profitability. And that's certainly the only way to survive while competition is rocketing thanks to globalization, and while consumers want to improve their social values. Indeed, if businessmen do not respect ethic values such as sustainability, companies have to pay taxes : Wal-Mart had to pay 85 millions dollars because it didn't manage its waste well.
In the long run, we see that doing business cannot truly be ethical. In any case, it is definitely not globally acknowledged because most economic actors don’t have « sufficient » development. Business just suits new trends (sustainability, fair trades, aware and powerful consumers…) and new needs. The debate is about the ethical issue, but it used to deal with growth and construction and it will soon concern business and robotic incipience.
2ème version :
« Doing business can never be ethical ? Discuss. »
Striking a balance between having a high profitability in business and guaranteeing social values is the fact to trade virtuously in order to promote global happiness. That may appear paradoxical in a world which experiences a rocketing competition thanks to globalization. Indeed, if economic actors should emphasize worldwide joy, they would have to establish a real relationship with their opponents. But is it helpful to wipe rivalry among sectors such as technology ? Frictions and competition are the means to develop more numeric tools, and it increases happiness. Apple would never have set up the Iphone 6s that big if Samsung didn’t made the Galaxy Note.
Then, fostering worldwide happiness do not seem so valuable. Companies may have understand this point, that’s maybe one of the reason for them to rely on security, equality, and social values. Benetton uses their ads in order to fight against racism. H&M develops the trend called « conscious ». What a great idea to get in touch with new markets. Indeed, today consumers pay attention to their purchases, they want clothes manufactured by people who face respectable rights. However, they also demand to get it increasingly faster, and decreasingly less expensive. Using machines and robots is the only way to meet their needs. Does it seem ethical then ?
In the long run, we see that doing business cannot truly be moral. There is too many paradox between human expectations and ways to provide for their needs. In any case, it is definitely not globally acknowledged because most economic actors don’t have « sufficient » development. However, we could make a note of new startups in developed countries which instigate social values. They do not care about all human rights, but each managers has his own opinion, his own will and he has to share it with his employees. Mr. Teeshirt manages its 25 employees well, it accepts the disabled, the elderly and it fosters working groups, whereas it prefers to overlook the fact that the shirts it imports are produced in China in abominable conditions… That’s a possibility to strike a balance.
Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais
