Introduction
External social forces have become significant drivers in corporate ethics. This is particularly right for corporations around the world. Corporations are expected to provide powerful consideration to social expectations in the field of general community participation and corporate responsibility. The digital era has imparted considerably to this improved significance of social pressures as forces acting rapidly when corporations fail to abide by social standards. The social setting of an organization can be fundamental to its achievement or collapse. The job environment oftenly impacts workers and can have either positive or negative implications on productivity. However, several impacts of the social pressures are better to evaluate compared to others (Ruggiero, 2011). Many organizations have taken crucial steps to build a constructive and perfect social environment in the place of work and have adjusted themselves to future accomplishments. This paper discusses the organizational ethics governing Google Corporation by evaluating how ethical principles address organizational issues.
External Social Pressures
The Google Social Improvement Cup for College Scholars is a social initiative that endeavors to endow young people to become advocates of social transformation (Ruggiero, 2011). By obtaining project suggestions from college scholars and supporting feasible proposals, Google expects to inculcate values in potential managers; the ideals of social accountability, the significance of social wellbeing, and the fortitude of self-empowerment. Social matters tackled comprise learning, poverty eradication, disability assistance, healthcare, women and children, talents, and traditions, as well as society improvement. Through mentorship and financial support, Google has played an important role in steering true social improvement globally (Verbos, Gerard, Forshey, Harding, & Miller, 2007). The idea of business ethics has developed considerably over time. In the past, business ethics referred to carrying out business in a manner that does not breach any major moral principles. This is based on community anticipations that organizations should satisfy demands for candid handling of clients, society involvement, and reasonable working conditions for workers and corporate friendly business operations.
The birth of the Internet has ignited social demands on organizations to stress community participation and socially accountable business operations. Google, for instance, has simply found it hard to disregard its exterior social pressures. This is because the Internet and Google search engines afford the public information regarding the corporate social responsibility of organizations (Verbos et al., 2007). Organizational ethics as well anticipate any business to contribute financially to the residents of the region it derives its income. Leveraging the capability to organize rapidly, societies have succeeded in putting social pressures such as boycotts in some instances to compel organizations to reassess their social resolutions. Google, for instance, has altered specific operations to safeguard the social environment better based on demands from social lobby organizations and the public.
Relevance to Organizational and Personal Decisions
External social pressures influence Google’s organizational ethics and personal decisions of its staff in several ways. A major way in which external social pressures influence Google relates to how it encourages or discourages the company’s employee collaboration. Organizations with a constructive social atmosphere where employees collaborate and are usually optimistic in their relationship to one another, collaboration and cooperation, are more likely to subsist compared to those with negative social environment. Unconstructive social environments usually promote opposition and conflict among employees and hamper the capability or readiness of workers to collaborate (Ruggiero, 2011). In a job setting where lack of enthusiasm is extensive, and workers are continually in disagreement with one another, employees are more likely to fear work and not have a constructive appraisal of their company.
Legal and Ethical Issues
An evident relationship exists between legal issues and ethical issues. Awful performance and issues that are not ethical are considered illegal. However, there are instances where legal and ethical issues are different. For example, unlawful issues may be conceived ethical in some instances while some legal issues might be conceived unethical as well. Social settings further complicate the relationship between legal and ethical issues as deemed by companies. For instance, Google has experienced challenges in China where the Chinese government banned some of the company’s websites such as the Falun Gong. Falun Gong is a government-prohibited religious group site that promotes freedom of speech in China (Verbos et al., 2007). Placing such sites on Google’s search engines is illegal in China, but not anywhere else in the world. Additionally, operating this website in China is ethical. Therefore, Google argues that the government should apparently make and adjust the law in accordance with what most people consider ethical. Consequently, it might be argued that in the business environment, legal and ethical issues are entirely not similar (Trevino & Nelson, 2010).
Conclusion
Since its establishment, Google has faced external social pressures and has been resolutely dedicated to dynamic social initiatives and handling international issues of climatic change, academic improvement, and poverty eradication. Since its inception, Google as well has initiated a series of social projects around the world (Verbos et al., 2007). Google anticipates that by leveraging its strengths and funds to social initiatives globally, the company will increase alertness of the significance of corporate responsibility, and support society to partake in the advancement of social responsibility.
References
Ruggiero, V.R. (2011). Thinking critically about ethical issues. Dubuque: McGraw-Hill.
Trevino, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2010). Managing business ethics. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Verbos, A. K., Gerard, J. A., Forshey, P. R., Harding, C. S., & Miller, J. S. (2007). The positive ethical organization: Enacting a living code of ethics and ethical organizational identity. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 17-33.