2. Starbucks might have been defensive at first, but very quick to recover for the wake of their reputation, expecially in the most critical of times. The attitude and tone of Sept. 11 ws emotional, sensitive, and cautious, and Starbucks HAD to respond in a beter way in order to maintain their sensitivity to the terrorist attacks. They had to respond in such an extreme way in order to save face, and they did well. I think it's crazy how much the world revolves around making sure every customer is perfectly pleased and satisfied, even if the company has done nothing intentionally wrong to them. But, like we've studied before, the customer is always right and he dictates what businesses do.
5. I'm not sure if I completely understand the principle Immanuel Kant is trying to explain--categorical imperative. It is a little confusing to me, but if I interpret right (after reading it a couple times) he is saying to make a decision that might be unethical in the process but that ensures success for everyone in the future. SO, if he means that, then I would think his advice to Starbucks would be to do just what they did--buy fair Trade Coffee because it benefited everyone in the end. Although Starbucks did not have to do anything unethically, they probably followed what Kant might have told them to to do.
I don't know. This question was a little confusing to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment