corporate philanthropy and the arts case revisited

corporate philanthropy and the arts case revisited -...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Lauren Brockmiller BUS101 Corporate Philanthropy Revisited The key stakeholders in this case would be the community. Their interests are losing the arts. Communities are very into the arts now days and they obviously do not want to lose these. It also will cost the community to lose these jobs because so many people will be out of work. This case is about the community, and how it is affected by everything a business does. Businesses benefit by being in culturally diverse places with good arts systems because there is something for them to contribute to. They can give back to the community, and that makes them look good in the eyes of the public. Businesses benefit from locating in communities with strong school systems and because there are diverse kids coming out of the schools. They are going to be able to catch students graduating and have first pick of the strong, well rounded kids. These benefits
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: justify supporting the arts because without the arts, every kid would be the same, and therefore a business would not get a new perspective on things. Friedman would say that the arts can support itself. He would not condone businesses supporting the arts; he would call it a social responsibility. Freeman however would say that it is the duty of the business to support the arts. The community is a key stakeholder and Freemans theory says that managers are supposed to balance the claims of all conflicting stakeholders. The business and community can often come into conflict, but this is why we pay managers and upper level positions so much. They are trained to solve problems like this, its their job....
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online