GRE作文范文 Issue-17

"The only responsibility of corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, is to make as much money as possible for their companies."

嘉文博譯Sample Essay

Corporate executives do have a responsibility to make money for their companies. For publicly owned companies, this means that they must find a way to maximize shareholder value. People buy shares in a company because they want to make money, therefore the more money that the company makes, the more money the stockholder can potentially make. But it would be wrong to say that, without qualification, making as much money as possible is an executive's only responsibility. Shareholder value can be maximized in ways other than by making money, such as the corporation's treatment of the global environment and people, the corporation's image, and its long-term viability as a stable corporation.

First of all, corporate executives have a duty to protect our natural environment and to not exploit human resources, particularly in lesser-developed countries. These poorer countries sometimes have poorly developed legal systems and laws that can be used unfairly by companies, even though the companies are actually operating within the limits of the law in that country. As an example, a pharmaceutical company should not be allowed to test new drugs on people in a poor country even though it is perfectly legal under that country's laws. Similarly, a chemical company should not be allowed to use manufacturing processes in a developing country that pollute and destroy the environment, whether those manufacturing processes are legal or not in that nation. Corporate executives must take it upon themselves to ensure that it operates ethically in all countries and that the corporation does not exploit lax operating laws in underdeveloped parts of the world.

Secondly, a related responsibility of corporate executives is to make sure that the company reflects a positive image to the rest of the world, thus giving stockholders and owners a sense of pride in being a part of that company. Most people do not want to be associated with a company that is seen as greedy or exploitive. If corporate executives focus solely on making as much money as possible, there can be a backlash against that company for appearing too materialistic and uncaring. Executives at multinational companies such as McDonalds and Wal-Mart have recognized this problem in the past and have now become heavily involved in the communities in which their stores are located through charitable programs. As just one example, McDonalds operates "Ronald McDonald's homes" which give parents a place to stay near hospitals where their children are undergoing medical treatment. Corporate executives have a responsibility to ensure that their companies are seen as "people friendly" rather than just focusing on bringing in more money.

A third and also related responsibility of corporate executives is to ensure the long-term viability of their companies. Employees, as well as other stakeholders, need to know that the company executives are interested in building an enduring institution. A good example of this responsibility not being honored is that of the Enron energy company and Arthur Andersen bankruptcy and accounting scandal. In this case, corporate executives abdicated their responsibilities to both companies in order to maximize short-term profit and possibly their own bonuses and stock options. Enron used misleading documents and practices that overstated its income by hundreds of millions of dollars. As Enron's accountants, Arthur Andersen certified that Enron's bookkeeping was all in order when in actuality they knew otherwise. Both companies' executives failed to look at the possible effects on the long-term viabilities of the companies. As a result, Enron has declared bankruptcy and Arthur Andersen, one of the world's most respected accounting firms, is being broken up into small pieces. Corporate executives have the responsibility to make sure that the corporation will continue to exist for the foreseeable future.

Corporate executives do have a responsibility to make as much money as possible. But they also have the responsibility to do so in a manner that helps to protect the world's environment and people, that reflects a positive corporate image, and that will guarantee the long-term survival of the company.

(662 words)

參考譯文

只要不違法，公司決策者的唯一責(zé)任就是為公司盡可能地多賺錢

為公司賺錢確實(shí)是公司決策者的責(zé)任。對(duì)于股份由多方共有的公司，這意味著他們必須找到能將股東利益最大化的方法。人們?cè)谝粋€(gè)公司購(gòu)買股份就是想要賺錢，因此，公司賺的錢越多股東的潛在收益也就越大。但是，如果絕對(duì)地說(shuō)賺錢就是公司決策者的唯一目的，那就大錯(cuò)特錯(cuò)了。除了賺錢，股東的利益還可以通過(guò)其它手法達(dá)到最大化，比如公司對(duì)全球環(huán)境、人類的貢獻(xiàn)、公司的形象以及它作為一個(gè)穩(wěn)定的組織所具有的長(zhǎng)期生命力。首先，公司決策者有保護(hù)我們的自然環(huán)境以及不對(duì)人力資源，特別是欠發(fā)達(dá)地區(qū)的人力資源，進(jìn)行剝削的責(zé)任。在這些較為貧窮的國(guó)家中，法制系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展也較為不完備，因此有些公司就利用法律從事有失公正的商業(yè)運(yùn)作，雖然它們表面上并沒(méi)有超出該國(guó)的法律規(guī)定。舉個(gè)例子，制藥廠不應(yīng)該被準(zhǔn)許利用貧窮國(guó)家的人來(lái)做新藥的實(shí)驗(yàn)，即便在該國(guó)這是完全合法的事情。與此相似，化工公司在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的生產(chǎn)過(guò)程不應(yīng)該對(duì)該國(guó)的環(huán)境造成污染或破壞，無(wú)論生產(chǎn)過(guò)程本身在該國(guó)是否合法。公司決策者應(yīng)該承擔(dān)起責(zé)任以確保其公司在所有國(guó)家的運(yùn)作都符合道德標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，確保其公司不去利用世界上不發(fā)達(dá)地區(qū)存在疏漏的現(xiàn)行法律。

其次，公司決策者的另一個(gè)相關(guān)的職責(zé)就是確保公司在世界上具有良好的形象，這樣股份持有人和公司所有者都會(huì)為自己是公司的一部分而感到自豪。大多數(shù)人都不愿意把自己同一個(gè)貪婪的或剝削人的公司聯(lián)系在一起。如果公司決策者關(guān)心的只是盡可能地多賺錢，那么該公司就有可能因?yàn)轱@得太過(guò)自私、重實(shí)利而招致強(qiáng)烈的反對(duì)。跨國(guó)公司如麥當(dāng)勞、沃爾馬特的決策者早在過(guò)去就已經(jīng)意識(shí)到了這個(gè)問(wèn)題，因此它們現(xiàn)在就能夠通過(guò)開(kāi)展慈善計(jì)劃而與分店所在社區(qū)保持緊密的聯(lián)系。讓我們僅僅看其中的一個(gè)例子：麥當(dāng)勞在醫(yī)院附近開(kāi)設(shè)了"羅納德·麥當(dāng)勞之家"，為有小孩在醫(yī)院進(jìn)行治療的家長(zhǎng)提供逗留之處。公司決策者有責(zé)任讓公司與社會(huì)民眾建立友好的關(guān)系而不僅僅是賺錢。

公司決策人的第三個(gè)而且與以上也相關(guān)的職責(zé)是確保公司長(zhǎng)期的生命力。公司職員以及其他股份持有人都需要知道，他們公司的決策者是要將公司長(zhǎng)久辦下去的。安龍能源公司和亞瑟·安德森公司的破產(chǎn)及財(cái)務(wù)丑聞案是一個(gè)很好的反面實(shí)例子。這兩個(gè)公司的決策者都為了擴(kuò)大短期收益，或者可能是為了自己的收益和股利，而忽略了自己的責(zé)任。安龍利用容易產(chǎn)生誤導(dǎo)的文件和行動(dòng)將收入額夸大了上億美元。作為安龍的財(cái)會(huì)公司，亞瑟·安德森公司在兩者都知道實(shí)情的情況下證實(shí)安龍公司的帳目準(zhǔn)確。兩個(gè)公司的決策者都沒(méi)有看到他們的這些做法給公司長(zhǎng)久生命力可能帶來(lái)的后果。結(jié)果，安龍公司宣布破產(chǎn)，而曾是世界最負(fù)盛名的財(cái)會(huì)公司之一的亞瑟·安德森公司也落得個(gè)分崩離析的下場(chǎng)。公司決策人有責(zé)任保證公司在可以預(yù)見(jiàn)的未來(lái)都一直生存下去。

為公司賺錢確實(shí)是公司決策者的責(zé)任。然而他們也有著保護(hù)世界環(huán)境和人類、樹(shù)立公司良好形象的責(zé)任和確保公司長(zhǎng)期生存下去的責(zé)任。