篇一：企业社会责任与商业伦理案例分析
暨南大学管理学院
《企业社会责任与商业伦理》
案例论文
题 目: 三鹿奶粉事件引发的对企业伦理的思考
学 号：1336093057
专 业: 工商管理
学生姓名：王鹤轩
任课教师： 李进一
2014年 8月
三鹿奶粉事件引发的对企业伦理的思考
一、三鹿奶粉事件回顾
从2008 年3 月份开始，三鹿集团陆续接到一些婴幼儿食用三鹿婴幼儿奶粉后患泌尿系统结石病的投诉。8 月初经专家鉴定三鹿公司涉嫌问题奶粉中有大量致肾病的三聚氰胺，并未对外公布。9 月份三鹿集团向消费者宣称已委托甘肃省质量技术监督局对本公司产品进行检验，结果显示符合国家的各项质量标准。直到2008 年9 月13 日，卫生部把“三鹿牌婴幼儿配方奶粉”事故定性为一起重大的食品安全事故时，三鹿集团仍未就此事向社会民众、媒体以及政府做出合理解释。随后，蒙牛、伊利、光明、完达山等数十个国内奶制品厂家的部分产品均被检测出不同程度的含有三聚氰胺，至此乳制品行业的三聚氰胺事件成为2008 年家喻户晓的事件，企业的社会责任问题被人们提到了首要位置。
二、三鹿奶粉事件原因分析
三鹿奶粉事件的发生绝非偶然，在现象背后掩藏着各种深层次的原因，分析如下：
1.奶制品供求关系不平衡。
随着生活水平的提高，人们普遍开始注重饮食的营养与健康，受近邻日本“一杯奶强壮一个民族”的影响和启发，以及营养科研的发展所证实，牛奶确实是一种非常好的营养食品，因此，专家大力呼吁公众增加奶的摄入量，而政府也制订各种政策来支持奶行业的发展。这些确实为增强国人体质做出贡献。然而问题在于，制订政策时，却忽略了这样一个事实：我国畜牧业的发展满足不看人们对牛奶的需求。国家的草场面临沙漠化、过度放牧等问题的困扰，因而其发展受到了严重的限制，畜牧业的受限自然导致了牛奶的产量的增长难以跟得上市场的需求。而一些企业为了片面追求市场占有率，为了企业的盲目扩张，“满足”所谓的市场需求，在奶源不够的情况下，使用不正当的竞争方式。同时，由于面临跨国大公司的竞争和压制，企业为了在日益开放的市场中占据主动，反制外资企业的压制，盲目追求短时间内企业的飞速壮大，这一切都导致了企业的负责人头脑发热，罔顾食品安全和老百姓对于健康食品的需求，也不顾企业长远发展的需要，在奶中添加了三聚氰胺，最终坑害了消费者，也毁了企业自身。
2.不良竞争和成本的增加。
近年来，国内奶制品企业竞争激烈，除了蒙牛、伊利、光明、三鹿等几家大企业以外，还有一些实力强大的外资企业，如雀巢等，以及一些本地发展的中小企业，而中国目前的竞
争往往是一个低层次的竞争--价格战。然而，随着这几年原材料、燃料、人力等等成本的大大增加，物价飞速上涨，奶制品行业同样也面临物价上涨的巨大压力。但是，市场的竞争异常惨烈，又使得这些企业在提高价
格方面不得不三思而为之。据统计，日常市场中售卖的所谓的鲜奶，如果按照鲜奶收购价格、再去掉其中的各种成本，其价格远远高于现在的市场价格，也就是说，企业如果利用真正的鲜奶来生产，其实是亏本的。同时，前检测鲜奶中蛋白质含量使用的凯氏定氮法，是通过检测氮的含量推算蛋白质含量的。因此，添加成本低廉的三聚氰胺增加牛奶和奶粉中的氮含量，使得蛋白质含量检测达标，几乎成了这个行业的一个潜规则。
3.监管和监督的缺失
在食品行业发展迅速的今天，应该怎么样来制订出行之有效的监督机制。我们目前的食品，从田间到餐桌，中间要经过企业加工、运输和市场等几个环节，而正是在这几个不同的环节，监管监督机构是不同的，在田间是属于农业部负责，而市场是属于质检部门负责，而到了餐桌到进入人体则是由卫生部负责，多家监管的好处是可以有多方力量共同来维护这个食物链的安全运转，但是正是由于多头监管，往往各部门为了自己的利益，加上中间的沟通的问题，往往却使得监管容易缺失，某些环节容易出现问题，从而造成食品安全事故。
4.企业社会责任意识的缺失。
如果企业不重视消费者的健康，只追求经济利润最大化，妄图用低劣食品来占领市场，壮大企业；如果企业缺失了良心和社会责任心，那么这个企业即使做得再大，也难有长远发展，最终会被消费者所抛弃；同样，如果相关部门不能进行有效的监管和监督，立法部门不能尽快制定出我们的食品安全法，那么就难以保证以后不会因为监督的缺失而再次发生严重的食品安全事件。
三、企业社会责任分析
1.企业应当承担社会责任的原因
对于企业是否应当承担社会责任的争论古已有之，而从当代的视角来看，企业社会责任的承担已被认为是企业生存必不可少的职责。
首先，企业承担社会责任是公众对企业的期望。从三聚氰胺事件发生后，网友们对于三鹿集团的声讨和谩骂中就可以看出，对于一个只谋求经济利益最大化而不顾消费者利益的企业，人们是极其不满的。
第二，只有勇于承担社会责任的企业才能获得长期利润。在乳制品中添加三聚氰胺，看似节约成本增加利润，但实质上却是将企业前途不管不顾的无知行为。
第三，承担社会责任能帮助企业树立良好的形象。不论是在三聚氰胺事件中破产的三鹿集团，还是受到牵连的蒙牛、伊利集团，他们在公众中的企业形象都受到损害，反观进口的雀巢公司，却因良好的口碑销量大增。
第四，全行业企业承担社会责任能够营造良好的社会环境。企业行为的导向作用是引导社会风气的重要原因。企业主动承担社会责任可以减轻政府压力，提高人民生活水平，引导积极的舆论方向。
第五，企业承担社会责任可以防患于未然。三聚氰胺事件就是企业未能承担社会责任引发严重社会问题的典型案例。在这次事件中，人们的生命安全受到巨大威胁，对于不仅仅是乳制品行业的各行各业的信心都受到打击，一时之间人人自危。假使企业在事件发生之前做好安全检查，那就不会引发如此之大的损失。
2.企业承担社会责任的动机
不得不承认的是，企业进行任何活动最原始的动机都是获取利润，承担社会责任也不例外。承担社会责任可以使得企业树立良好的形象，获得民众的信任和认可，这些都是企业的无形资产。积极主动承担社会责任才能让企业始终充满活力和生机，获得长期发展。
其次，企业也应当从整个人类社会的角度出发，作为社会的活动主体，理应考虑其他人的利益，谋求社会的共同发展。当大多数企业忽略社会责任时，消费者对整个行业失去信任，其中每一个企业都会出现生存危机。企业和消费者都得不到利益，社会发展也将停滞不前。
3.企业社会责任感缺失的原因
尽管从各个层面上来看企业都应当承担社会责任，但是近年来企业社会责任感的缺失却屡见不鲜：三聚氰胺事件、双汇事件、汶川地震捐款事件，等等。纵观各种事件，从中总结，导致企业社会责任缺失的原因是多方面的，概括起来主要有以下几点：
（1）企业以追求经济利益为主，而忽视消费者的权利。
随着社会的不断发展，越来越多的管理者意识到单纯追求经济利益的做法，已经不能适应当今社会的发展。但是，从企业的净利润考虑，一旦承担社会责任必然意味着生产成本的增加，因此企业急功近利，不按质量标准生产，在生产过程中擅自添加禁用品。比如，三鹿集团的管理当局很早就知道自己生产的奶粉三聚氰胺超标，但为了追求更多的经济利益，而忽视消费者、供应商等利益相关者的利益。因此，当他们知道事实真相后，并不是想着怎样去挽回消费者的利益、如何去弥补受害人的损失，却一味掩盖现实，正是这种错误的举动导致事态进一步扩大，消费者受到更大的伤害。随后，三鹿集团为了维护自己的品牌形象，又试图将责任推卸给奶农，认为是不法奶农为提高牛奶中的蛋白质含量而添加三聚氰胺，并声
称这些与三鹿集团没有任何关系。他们一直都没有检讨自己收奶时的把关不严，加工中的质量检查不严，以及在产品出厂时的质量检疫敷衍了事的问题。2008 年9 月份当三聚氰胺事件真相曝光后，该公司副总裁张振岭在新闻发布会上宣读了致社会各界人士和广大消费者的一封公开信，向因食用三鹿婴幼儿配方奶粉导致的患儿及家属道歉，从道歉信来看，三鹿集团仍然没有对自己内部的问题进行反省，只强调是外面原因。对于自己应当承担的社会责任仍然没有清醒的认识，更谈不上积极履行。三鹿的品牌价值迅速下滑，2009 年2 月份三鹿集团正式宣布破产，这意味着三鹿被消费者抛弃，被市场淘汰。
（2）行业间恶性竞争，忽视供应商的利益。
从2005 年开始，三鹿、蒙牛、伊利、光明、完达山等乳企均进入飞速发展时期。以三鹿集团为例，从2005 年开始陆续在全国设立30 余家分厂。就在全国乳企一片扩张声中，国家为了限制乳制品行业的恶性竞争，规定各家乳品企业设厂间距要有100 公里以上。但事实上，蒙牛、伊利、三鹿等乳品企业相继建厂，导致河北市场每100 公里内有就有四五家乳企的工厂。使得当地日加工鲜奶能力达到12，000 吨，但全市奶牛日产奶仅4000 多吨。前方扩张的乳企面临着空前的后方奶源危机。作为乳制品行业的供应商———奶农又比较分散，议价能力较差，因此鲜奶价格一直由乳企规定。乳企为了在终端市场占领更大市场份额，大打价格战，由此压低上游鲜奶价格。加之2006 年下半年起，奶牛饲料价格高涨，于是为了争夺有限的奶源，大部分由私人拥有的收奶站，也成了各家乳企竞相争取的对象。这些奶站用扣押奶款的方式控制奶农，而奶站又利用乳企间的竞争索要高价。其中有一些人甚至发展为“奶霸”，下控奶农，上与各乳企要高价。很奶站不甘心只赚每公斤鲜奶1～2 毛钱的“抽头费”，开始在奶中加“东西”，奶站掺假愈发猖獗，比如三聚氰胺加水就可提高蛋白质的含量。
（3）政府及社会监管不力。
根据调查，多数政府管理部门对企业社会责任问题了解甚少，或者根本没有概念，对其利害关系没有清醒的认识，只注重企业的利润和税收，而对企业守法行为的监督力度不够。即使有些地方政府了解情况，也并没有从整体上积极推进。很多政府部门和企业互相包庇，为了保护当地企业和控制“负面影响”，延误上报达月余，直到事态蔓延到不可收拾的地步，被新闻媒体曝光以后，才采取相应对策。如在三鹿毒奶粉事件中，因为三鹿“请政府加强媒体的管控和协调”，而市政府非常“关心、呵护”纳税人而大力支持的结果，所以媒体没有及时告知。当事态发展到不可收拾的时候，石家庄市政府才就三鹿奶粉事件公开道歉。
（4）领导者的思想道德观念薄弱，责任意识
篇二：商业伦理案例分析En
Ethical theory and its application to the case study:
The Auto Companies in China
Is it right that car companies establish factories in China and develop its automobile industry? It's hard to say, the development of automobile industry at the same time bring the energy more loss. Every coin has its two sides, which is right? Let us analysis it from the ethical perspective: they are: Utilitarianism, Kantian deontology, justice, right and Ethical Relativism.
Utilitarianism
Firstly, what is Utilitarianism? An action is right if it leads to the greatest possible balance of good consequences for everyone affected by the action. Whether any one
(A) has done what is right depends on how good or bad the consequences of A’s actions are for everyone affected. Thus, how A is affected is relevant; but so is how others are affected. One’s good is as worthwhile as every person, this it not egoistic or altruistic but universalistic. Utilitarianism aims at maximizing the greatest good for the greatest number. But how to do it? Maybe we can assess all the consequences on all those affected by the action/decision in the long & short term, valuing each person equally. But we should remember the motto that ends justifies the means. After we finish that we could get the result that it guides people’s actions to producing a better world.
In the utilitarian view, car companies help China to expand automobile industry is wrong. Although, automobile companies' measures were to develop China's auto market and the car factory, also it caused car sales promotion, and the technology is
more skilled, it caused innovation, it pulled the country's economic development. At the same time it promoted the employment. But, this is relative in China, relative to the auto industry a small branch. Although the car company's motive and means are correct, but in the utilitarian view, the development of China's automotive industry will lead to the fuel shortage and be in short supply, and prices rise, breaking supply balance. This led to a global problem, so that "the greatest happiness value reduced". And the decrease of the biggest happiness is the evil. Obviously, from this perspective, the car companies were wrong.
Kantian deontology
Kant emphasized the way in which moral life is centered on duty. Ethics is all about what duties they are, how we can find out what they are and why we must obey them. Actually, when reasons guide the will, one can act from “duty”. Reason is the same for all individuals; therefore morality has an objective basis. it because our function is to be rational agents. Happiness is not the highest good.
From Kantian deontology, we can see, this is a theory that is completely opposite utilitarian value. From this perspective, the car companies established factories in China , to help the development of automobile industry, is a kind of moral , not doping any interest value, not considering the influence of China and the world, but in doing one's duty. It is a kind of good that will promote, this kind of good will not depend on joy or sadness to judge the good or bad. With car companies helping China, China has the advanced automobile manufacturing technology, this is good. So from this point of view, the car companies are actually right. They all came to their
obligation, they passed their technology and experiences to others, without considering other external factors, this is good, and this is for their own good. But if the car company just took, did not perform the corresponding responsibility, and did not pay attention to the other, and that is wrong, it cannot stand the test of Kantian deontology.
Justice
The justice view considers ethical behavior as that which is impartial and fair in treating people according to guiding rules and standards. Justice has five types: Compensatory Justice, Retributive Justice, Procedural Justice, Commutative Justice and Distributive Justice. Compensatory Justice means compensation should be proportional to harm for the past. And Retributive Justice is to imposition of punishments and penalties on wrong doers, both corporations and individuals. Procedural Justice need fair decision procedures, practices or agreements. Commutative Justice can function in transactions. Last Distributive Justice means fair distribution of society’s benefits and burdens.
From the point of view of justice, the car companies' help for China is ueasonable. Because it doesn’t depend on the theory of justice equality principle of distribution. The growth of China's automotive industry certainly will drive the fuel price promotion and energy shortage; it affects the normal operation of other areas. Residents’ daily life will be short of fuel, the shortage of other countries industrial energy, it seriously affects the fair distribution, and it was also far from the justice. Although the theory of justice also mention that "if not justice, unless the average
distribution of one kind of value or all one kind of value inequality distribution to each one's interests. So it is to say, other countries develop the car industry earlier, then the inequality was distributed to the interests of everyone, now is different, fuel tense situation is what we have to face, the average distribution is even more important. On the other hand, developed countries had developed their automobile industry, and developing countries also have the right to develop their car industry. Developed countries caused pollution of the environment and resource depletion, but they couldn’t limit the development of China depending on this. So China has the right to the development of the car industry. But what we need to pay attention to is that the right is not infinite, it needs to be considered various factors, and it should be used reasonably. Therefore, from the point of view of justice, the car company to do so is wrong.
Right
A right is something I am entitled to, if I want it. My right to something puts others under a duty (or obligation) to treat me in such a way that my right can be fulfilled. That means a claim that one is entitled to be treated in a certain way or something that a person chooses to exercise if he wants to. It includes two sides: Negative Rights and Positive Rights. Negative Right is the entitlement to be left alone free of interference from others. For example, right to free speech, right to smoke, right to do business, etc. And Positive Right is entitlement to be provided with something or have something done for one. For example right to health care, education and work. From the ethical perspective, rights and obligations are not absolutely equivalence
relation, car companies established factories in China, to help the development of the car industry in China, it is their right, benefit is their rights, although they should safeguard world energy balance of responsibility, but the rights and responsibility are not equal, they make full use of their rights, and that's what they want to do, others have no right to interfere with, isn't it? So, automobile enterprises in China to help the development of the car industry are understandable.
Ethical Relativism
Ethical Relativism is an ethical theory that claims right and wrong is subjectively determined by each culture (or individual or group, society or religion). Of course Relativism also has two types: Descriptive Ethical Relativism which claims as a matter of fact that different cultures have different moral values. The other one is Normative Ethical Relativism which claims that each culture is right unto it and denies that we can make rational or objective ethical judgments. What is good is socially accepted and what is bad is socially unacceptable in a given culture. There is no such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only the various cultural codes and nothing more. Different cultures have different moral codes; therefore, there is no objective “truth” in morality. If the car company can follow the rules, and give full consideration to the interests of the host country, it's not wrong. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.
So, car companies to help China's development of automobile industry, there is no right and wrong of the points. Often in China this is regarded as a kind of right, but in other places have might be seen as wrong, this closely is the cultural difference, lead
篇三：商业伦理案例
商业伦理案例
2014年上海福喜食品大量采用过期肉
事件回放：
据调查发现，上海福喜食品有限公司存在大量采用过期变质肉类原料的行为。这家公司被曝通过过期食品回锅重做、更改保质期标印等手段加工过期劣质肉类，再将生产的麦乐鸡块、牛排、汉堡肉等售给肯德基、麦当劳、必胜客等大部分快餐连锁店。有工作人员甚至侃言：
“过期也吃不死人”。
2014年6月18日，18吨过期半个月的冰鲜鸡皮和鸡胸肉被掺入原料当中，制成黄灿灿的“麦乐鸡”。记者还获悉，这些过期鸡肉原料被优先安排在中国使用。另外，肯德基的烟熏肉饼同样使用了过期近一个月的原料。2014年6月11日和12日，该公司加工的迷你小牛排使用了10吨过期的半成品，这些材料原本都应该作为垃圾处理掉。但是，经过处理，保
质期又重新打印延长了一年。
对于媒体报道的麦当劳个别供应商存在的问题，麦当劳方面昨晚表示，已第一时间通知全国所有餐厅，立即停用并封存由上海福喜提供的所有肉类食品。同时，公司立即成立调查小组，对上海福喜及其关联企业展开全面调查，并将尽快公布结果。即刻封存并停用由上海福喜提
供的所有肉类食品原料。因停用上海福喜产品会造成三款产品出现临时断货。
《商业伦理案例分析》由：创业找项目整理
链接地址：http://www.gjknj.com/duwu/6229.html
转载请保留,谢谢!