Mcdonald's Case Of Mcdonalds

1350 Words6 Pages
McDonald’s corporation, which is a global fast food company will be the case studied in this essay. It has opened more than 200 restaurants in Hong Kong, which is a well-known fast food chain in Hong Kong. As a global fast food chain, it is inevitable that McDonald’s will encounter different conflicts of interest between shareholders and stakeholders, including philanthropy and food safety. It is vitally important for McDonald’s to cope with these problems as a global company, since a number of stakeholders and shareholders are involved in these issues.

According to the official website of McDonald’s , philanthropic programs such as environmental protection, volunteer works and Ronald McDonald House Charities are launched to give back to
…show more content…
Provided that McDonald’s is a public limited company, philanthropic programs launched by McDonald’s corporation will definitely affect the interest of shareholders. According to social responsibility suggested by Milton Friedman , the sole corporate social responsibility of McDonald’s should be maximizing the interest of shareholders. However, philanthropic programs not only being unable to generate any profits to McDonald’s, but also involve costs in holding such programs which reduce the profits. As dividends and revenue of McDonald’s are tightly affiliated to the costs of firms’ operation. In this sense, the interest of shareholders of McDonald’s is harmed when philanthropic programs are proposed and launched. Obviously, the conflicts between stakeholders, such as managers who propose and execute the philanthropic programs, and shareholders of McDonald’s exists. Nonetheless, does it imply that McDonald’s has no responsibility on philanthropy? According to social responsibility suggested by Peter Drucker , even McDonald’s is a business which is profit-oriented, McDonald’s can still convert philanthropic work into an opportunity to generate profits. However, philanthropic programs launched by McDonald’s are unable to generate any profits. Therefore, it is difficult to justify its responsibility on philanthropy. Furthermore, it cannot…show more content…
Also, it cannot be morally justified because it ignores the interest of either stakeholders or shareholders in the above issues. In contrast, Kant’s philosophy and Michael Jensen’s stakeholder theory not only cope with the problems arisen from these issues, but also being morally justified. To conclude, voting system derived from Kant’s philosophy and the responsibility of the managers of McDonald’s derived from Michael Jensen’s stakeholder theory are necessary to solve the conflicts between shareholders and stakeholders of McDonald’s in the above issues.

Reference:

Corporate Social Responsibility McDonald 's Hong Kong. (n.d.). Retrieved May 14, 2016, from http://www.mcdonalds.com.hk/en/social-responsibility.html

Moy, P. (2014, July 28). McDonald 's misled Hong Kong food safety authority about rotten meat, says official. Retrieved May 14, 2016, from http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1561221/mcdonalds-misled-hong-kong-food-safety-authority-about-rotten-meat

Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The New York Times Magazine.

Drucker, P. (1984, Winter). The New Meaning of Corporate Social Responsibility. California Management Review,
Open Document