What are the ethical boundaries of a sponsorship of a nonprofit organization and a for-profit organization? Case study 3-D presented by Patterson & Wilkins (2014, p. 70) is concerned with the University of Phoenix’s sponsorship of nonprofit organization that provide free preschool for children living in poverty. The University of Phoenix maintained a close relationship with the nonprofit organization and was heavily promoted as part of the sponsorship agreement. Many people question the ethical implications of partnerships between nonprofit and for-profit organizations, and many have particularly criticized the University of Phoenix for various reasons.
Micro Issues First, the University of Phoenix typically caters to low-income students,
…show more content…
The current political climate has many citizens who dislike corporate influence and distrust large organizations in general. For example, a sponsorship from a Wall Street business for an education-based nonprofit would likely be distrusted. Social responsibility plays a large role in the appropriateness of sponsorships. Patterson & Wilkins (2014, p. 72) give the example ethically questionable situation of Budweiser sponsoring football tailgating at a university. The sponsorship would not be appropriate since it could lead to underage drinking and drunk driving. Non-profits should do in-depth research, such as reading news articles and viewing advertisements, of the for-profits that want to sponsor them by checking their mission statements, business practices, and their overall public image. Phoenix University is not an inherently bad corporate citizen, but it would be a stretch to consider them the model corporate citizen. The main issue is the lack of social responsibility in their targeting of a specific demographic using the sponsorship like an advertisement for a service that many low-income families will not be able to afford (Patterson & Wilkins, 2014, p. 59). Motives matter since they influence how a corporation will conduct business and the overall character of the corporate
September 29, 2017 Officer Beckman, Supervisor Manley County Probation Department 555 Chestnut Lane Bouldercreek, GA 28394 Dear Officer Beckman: When it comes to life outcomes for any given person, there are unlimited people, circumstances, and personal choices that can affect a person and the life that they may lead for themselves. When trying to understand the details that produce any final result, the truth of the matter can be messy, complicated, and sometimes unclear. In most cases, there is not any one thing that caused a downward spiral or an upward shot, but rather a sequence of events, a plethora of circumstances, and a wide variety of people.
For example “The First Things First Foundation is a Christian organization founded by the NFL quarterback Kurt Warner and his wife Brenda in May 2001” (ksdk.com). This shows he cares for his community. Another example is “Louis Rams Quarterback Kurt Warner's First Things First Foundation teamed up with U-Haul, Habitat for Humanity and Aaron's Inc. to reward a first-time homebuyer with a house filled with $10,000 worth of food, furniture and appliances” (ksdk.com). This shows he is willing to donate and help out those in need. One more example is “Treasure House began as the vision of Kurt and Brenda Warner out of love for their son Zachary — who was unable to receive the kind of care that would enable him to live a more fulfilling and independent life with the resources available to him in Arizona” (treasure house.org).
The Big organizations usually have some fund for the society welfare and if they become attracted through the positive word-of-mouth, they can also provide fund to “Brand name”. The marketing communication mixes such as public relation (using Facebook, Tweeter- social media), direct marketing (one-to-one communication, telemarketing), online advertisements (YouTube, magazines, and newspapers) etc. can be used to build and maintain relationship with the donors and the general people. But one thing should always be in “Brand name” mind that it will have to maintain the promise to build the ‘trust’ among the
The NASW Code of Ethics’ Connection to the Sanchez family Case The Sanchez family is a multigenerational family, not unlike other families living in the United States. Current person-in-environment conditions and lifestyle choices hinder the capability to improve their quality of life. Intervention from competent and committed professionals will change the dynamic challenges the family faces.
I enjoy reading your post; you provided sound knowledge of the ACA and NAADAC Code of Ethics. “The NAADAC Code of Ethics was written to govern the conduct of its member and it is the accepted standard of conduct for addiction professionals certified by the National Certification Commission.” Therefore, it is the responsibility of the addiction professional to safeguard the integrity of the counseling relationship and to ensure that the client is provided with services that are most beneficial. In all areas of function, the addiction professional is likely to encounter individuals who are vulnerable and exploitable. In such relationships he/she seeks to nurture and support the development of a relationship of equals rather than to take unfair
What if it were discovered that the American Red Cross behaved unethically, such as consistently responding only to rich, white neighborhoods first in times of natural disasters? Or that they only provide blood to affluent people or those that have made donations to the American Red Cross? Or that they mishandle the notification of death or injury to loved ones serving overseas or handle it unprofessionally? These scenarios are unethical and would tarnish the company’s reputation. The public’s trust in the foundation would be shaken, probably irreversibly.
In regards to the scenario of the patient Cindy who had an affair while being married, one of the red flags that I noticed was AACC Code 1-143 counseling with family, friends and acquaintances. According to the scenario, Cindy, as well as her family, attend the same church as the counselor, but also know the counselor very well. This was a breach in ethics on the counselor’s part, because in the AACC code, it states in Code 1-143, “Christian counselors do not provide counseling to close family or friends.” (Clinton, Ohlschlager, and Hart; pg. 269). The counselor has already broken the ethics code by giving Cindy counseling advice, which is part of the AACC code 1-145 (pg.269).
Organizations that operate for-profit healthcare argue that they offer patients more options and flexibility. On the other hand, nonprofits claim to provide a superior patient experience and are more cost-effective. In keeping with their charitable mission and community focus, nonprofit hospitals are often affiliated with a particular religious denomination. For-profit hospitals are either owned by investors or shareholders of a publicly-traded company. For-profit healthcare entities are more likely to prioritize treatments that generate higher profits, such as open-heart surgeries.
The overriding issue presented in this scenario is one of bullying experienced by the less fortunate scholarship student on the grounds of his “scruffy” appearance. The NSW Department of Education and Communities (2016, 1.1) has a zero tolerance to any form of bullying within the learning environment, whether it be physical or psychological. This is exhibited within this scenario as the other students are misusing their more fortunate socio-economic position to bastardize this student who falls outside their circle of acceptance. However, despite their meaningful intentions, educators must take the appropriate steps to ensure that ethical conundrums do not present themselves, whilst bearing in mind both the students wellbeing and maintaining
The ASPCA foundation could’ve had some information that showed the effect of people donating money. This would have enhanced the possibility of people donating money because they will actually know that they are helping. Also, they will know that their money is not going to waste. Even though the “Somewhere in America” commercial did have logos, it could have been better so that they could catch the audience’s attention and convince them to donate
Core Values and Ethical Principles The six core values recognized by the NASW Code of Ethics are: service, social justice, dignity and worth of person, importance of human relationships, integrity, and competence (NASW, 2008). These values are defined and expanded upon, and are then listed as ethical principles. Several of these principles apply to this case.
According to The Atlantic, James Reynolds created organization claiming to be charities, mostly having to do with cancer. In reality, he “spent consumer donations on cars, trips, luxury cruises, college tuition, gym memberships, jet ski outings, sporting event and concert tickets, and dating site memberships.” Reynolds took advantage of people’s hearts and got them to donate money, which was used for his own luxury. If the money is going to be used for leisure, then it might as well be for the leisure of the person who earned the money. The possibility of people donating money to someone that is not going to use it for the less fortunate deters people from wanting to donate in the first place.
Introduction The key ethical issues that were presented in this case study were quality control, lack of customer care, responsiveness, and harming the customer. The Johnson and Johnson case may have been seen as a turning point due to many things the company did right. However, there were many ethical issues in this case which will be explored more throughout this paper.
Here you look on the difference between benefits and harms for the society and if the benefits are greater than the decision or an action is considered as ethical, if lower – unethical. Here it is important to identify the stakeholders and an effects on them from actions or decisions of a company. “You can think of a stakeholder as a person or organization that can affect or be affected by your organization. Stakeholders can come from inside or outside of the organization. Examples of stakeholders of a business include customers, employees, stockholders, suppliers, non-profit community organizations, government, and the local community among many others.”
Business contributions to financial resources or executive time, such as contributions to the educations, arts or the community, are the examples of philanthropy. The point which distinguishes the philanthropy and ethical responsibilities is that the former are only desired and not expected in an ethical and moral help. Philanthropy is more voluntary or discretionary on the part of businesses. Communities desire firms to contribute their funds, facilities and time to the social programmes or purposes, but if the firms do not provide the desired level they are not regarded as unethical. As a part of philanthropic responsibilities it is important that managers and employees participate in charitable activities in their local communities, they provide assistance to private and public educational institutions and assist voluntary to those projects which enhance the communities’ “quality of