Introduction
Matters concerning corporate social responsibility (CSR) are particularly influential for major corporations like Apple. Several years ago, the company was condemned for ethical violations of mistreating employees of its international supply chain (Lee et al., 2016). Areas primarily involved in Apple’s CSR case were China and Taiwan, where the business’s large suppliers, Foxconn and Pegatron, were located (Lee et al., 2016). Key problems and concerns focused on staff members attempting to commit suicide due to poor working conditions at Foxconn and violations of employees’ rights in Pegatron (Lee et al., 2016). Questions about CSR concentrated on whether such a prominent market player as Apple could be held at a higher level of SCR and how it should have managed the raised problems (Lee et al., 2016). Public opinion was rather controversial as some stated that Apple could not control its overseas partners, while others noted that the corporation always had excuses not to improve its operations (Lee et al., 2016). Apple’s CSR issues demonstrate the significance of proper labor practices for an international company.
Corporate Social Responsibility
CSR is important to a business due to affecting the personnel’s perceptions of the job. A firm’s workers are vital for its competitive advantage, indicating that CSR concerning employee treatment is crucial (Dunung, 2020). For instance, CSR provides staff members with a sense of safety, self-esteem, social validation, and existential meaning (Tsalikis & Seaton, 2020). SCR performance enhances a company’s potencies at war for talent by facilitating the attraction of good employees (Dunung, 2020; Tsalikis & Seaton, 2020). Therefore, CSR influences a business by creating a favorable image of the organization where staff members feel comfortable working.
Public Opinion
In the case of Apple and CSR, media and public opinion influenced the situation by bringing attention to the suppliers’ poor employment practices. For example, when a report of Pegatron committing legal and ethical violations of working conditions was published, Apple promised to address the identified issues (Lee et al., 2016). However, the global news media, including a BBC-produced documentary, later announced that Apple failed to improve the situation (Lee et al., 2016). Nonetheless, some people proposed that Apple was not the only global corporation with employee treatment problems, revealing differences in the perception of the case (Lee et al., 2016). A business practitioner can learn from Apple’s experience that media can present a company in various ways and that public opinion concerning a matter is likely to vary.
International Business
Apple’s case suggests that a corporation is responsible for its suppliers. Overseas outsourcing decreases a firm’s control over the production process and the partners (Lee et al., 2016). However, Apple was accountable for problems in Foxconn and Pegatron due to imposing conflicting demands, like enhancing working conditions while being pushed to accept Apple’s lowering prices (Lee et al., 2016). The situation can teach corporate professionals that an international business can be held responsible for its suppliers’ actions.
Labor Practices
Commonly used labor practices in international business are associated with strategic planning. The methods are based on offering rewards, promoting diversity, and focusing on talent management (Dunung, 2020). The advantages of such practices are facilitating skill development, increasing performance, and attracting and retaining the most competent employees (Dunung, 2020). In comparison, some disadvantages are that the approaches require substantial effort alongside managing similarities and differences of a diverse workforce (Dunung, 2020). Commonly utilized labor practices can improve a company’s operations but may be challenging to oversee.
The Road Ahead
Finally, Apple should have proceeded following the incident outlined in the case by improving the work conditions of its suppliers’ employees. First, the smartphone industry is likely to decline soon, meaning that Apple may lose many clients (Lee et al., 2016). Second, by increasing the public’s anger and blame attitudes, the media can encourage society to boycott Apple because of its suppliers’ wrongdoings (Lim & Shim, 2019). Third, employees are vital to a company’s competitive advantage and must be prioritized for long-term accomplishments (Dunung, 2020). Apple should have put more effort into enhancing labor conditions to ensure that staff members and clients strive for the enterprise’s triumph.
Conclusion
To summarize, the case of Apple’s CSR illustrates that international firms should maintain proper labor practices for prolonged success. A globally operating organization can be held responsible for its suppliers and must control how the partners manage their staff members. At the center of a company are its employees, who must be treated properly to prevent tragic incidents like in Foxconn and unfavorable publicity like in Pegatron.
References
Dunung, S. P. (2020). Global business management. Atma Global Knowledge Media, Inc.
Lee, S. H., Mol, M. J, & Mellahi, K. (2016). Apple and its suppliers: Corporate social responsibility [PDF document].
Lim, J. S., & Shim, K. (2019). Corporate social responsibility beyond borders: US consumer boycotts of a global company over sweatshop issues in supplier factories overseas. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(12), 1643-1664. Web.
Tsalikis, J., & Seaton, B. (2020). Corporate social responsibility: A cross-national study of the treatment of consumers and employees. Business Ethics and Leadership, 4(2), 6-15. Web.