MGT 365 week 7 Discussion - post and response
INeal
RR.docx3 minutes ago
Jackson Hatfield
Alibaba
Top of Form
Overall Rating:
· 1
· 2
· 3
· 4
· 5
· 1
· 2
· 3
· 4
· 5
Alibaba was facing a few problems. Alibaba’s website did not allow access to a wide range of information about suppliers. It was difficult for buyers to view things such as quality standards and how company’s treated there workers. Due to the increasing access of information on the internet around the world, users of the Alibaba took issue to the lack of transparency on their platform. Jack Ma, the CEO of Alibaba, is faced with the dilemma of how to fix these problems while aligning Western, Asian, and non-government organization’s perspectives. One way to face these issues is to try to improve the working conditions of each individual supplier. This option would use a lot of resources and company time to achieve. The second option is to stop doing business with the companies that do not adhere to a certain set of ethical standards set by Alibaba. In addition, a third party would assist in making more information about the suppliers available. The third option is a combination of the first two options. I believe a combination of both options is the best choice from a PR standpoint. However, it is a little unrealistic to say that Alibaba can help every single company improve overall working conditions. I don’t believe there is such thing as being too successful and profitable. Although as a company increases their profits and becomes more successful, the more social responsibilities they have.
Sources: https://blackboard.cmich.edu/bbcswebdav/courses/MGT365-21300-22384288_CR/2016_CS_free-case_Alibaba.com_case.pdf
Bottom of Form
Veronica Yacks
Alibaba
Top of Form
Overall Rating:
· 1
· 2
· 3
· 4
· 5
· 1
· 2
· 3
· 4
· 5
After reading through the case regarding Alibaba, it’s clear to see that they, as a company, are failing ethically and in their social responsibility to implement a transparency system. The company has created a lot of problems with their suppliers as well as consumers. These problems have created a sense of distrust in the company. According to the reading, “since Alibabi offered no system that showed how good a supplier was, it was difficult for positive evaluated suppliers to send the corresponding signals”. Because of this, bad suppliers were sometimes chosen over good ones which ultimately endangered the business of well performing suppliers. Along with this, some good suppliers were treated with mistrust when they were in fact reliable. The reading also went on to say that the satisfaction also decreased. There was a great challenge to find suitable and good suppliers with a sustainable approach. Many customers found themselves having to make impulse purchases and having to take on the responsibility for these impulse decisions with their supervisors. These unreliable suppliers caused disruptions in businesses performing their daily duties. One thing that I did notice from the reading though, was that Alibaba only offers a platform to Chinese suppliers and allows them to connect with clients across the borders. While Alibaba offers the platform, they do not have any warehouses and are not involved in any distribution channels, according to the reading.
Going off of this, Alibaba also knew what the requirements were that western companies were asking for and yet they still failed to ethically inform. The reading stated that Alibaba accepted every supplier regardless of the corporate production standards and cultural issues. Because of this, it was likely that firms that were listed on Alibaba could employ for example children. The reading goes on to say that often times customers wanted to check to see whether a supplier matched the values and norms of their firm. Therefore, in order to get the information that they wanted, they would have to contact the supplier directly and ask personally. For multiple reasons, this process was highly disliked by Western companies. The overall lack of information provided served as cause for future problems that could have been prevented. To counter this, Alibaba should bring attention to start-up suppliers as a signal to their consumers. This could include labeling suppliers that are receiving certifications. However, Alibaba preferred to optimize profit by offering a membership to users that offered information about suppliers like if they were a minor trader or a leading manufacturer. While this membership did offer information, it still needed to be interpreted by someone who knew the data. However, this was hard since many western startups and small sized companies were the ones that were using the information that was being provided. This becomes a problem when Alibaba is aware of these situations and still chooses to act unethically.
Since the Chinese culture and their policies are not generally appreciated by everyone this case serves as a good source for teaching for how other global businesses should conduct business. For starters, if a company wants to conduct business by themselves independently, they need to regulate and help smaller businesses receive correct information. Along with this, there should be more precautions taking place to protect consumers from fraudulent suppliers since there is currently no verification process instilled to verify things like the quality of the product, the company’s operating standard in terms of the environment, and the company’s working conditions. Going back to how some of these companies employ children, there should be regulations in place to protect children from this type of exploitation. If children are going to be working in these places there should be plans set in place to improve working conditions to protect the children. Since some children may have to work to help support their family, these regulations will at least protect the children.
Ultimately, I think that all companies have responsibilities that they need to meet. This is especially true for large and successful businesses. Often times smaller businesses or start-ups will model aspects of their business off of other successful businesses strategic models. No matter how much power or control the business has they should still be held accountable for their actions and decisions and be expected to act ethically and responsibly. Meaning that they should always follow laws and regulations and not engage in unethical behavior. As for the final question, I do think that there is a thing as being too successful or too profitable. Some examples of companies that I would say are “too successful” or “too profitable” would be Apple, Amazon, and Google. This is because these companies have often found their way out of controversy without repercussions due to their size, success, and power. Therefore, companies can be too successful in my opinion because with success comes power and too much power can be harmful in any situation.
Bottom of Form
