时间：2022-02-03 02:12:40
摘 要：A CEO of a company is like the king of an empire. How the CEO decides to run his or her company can make a great difference to the employees and the whole enterprise， even to the society. In my opinion， a business can be successful if it is managed benevolently.
关键词：Benevolence；Success；Business
中图分类号：G642 文献标识码：B 文章编号：1002-7661（2014）23-010-02
A CEO of a company is like the king of an empire. How the CEO decides to run his or her company can make a great difference to the employees and the whole enterprise， even to the society. In my opinion， a business can be successful if it is managed benevolently. In addition， if a business is run in a not benevolent way it may face lots of problems after a short-term thriving.
On one hand， a company can grow healthily and survive through many crises if it is run in a benevolent way.
Mencius made recommendations to the king about how an empire ruler could use his behavior to educate his followers in both bad ways and good ways （Excerpts from Mencius 1A1）. So as to run a company， a CEO must be aware of running business in a benevolent way so that he or she could make it as a good example for the employees and the other enterprises in the society. Given the fact that not all the employees have the attitude of making contributions to the company in a right way when they enter a new workforce， they will study and follow their boss to do their work. Therefore， the actions that a leader makes can be the guidance to the employees. If a CEO is kind and gentle， he or she and the company can win a group of loyal people and a good reputation in the field. Other companies will have a proper model to initiate as well.
Mencius explained why young men growing under different circumstances （rich or poor） may have different qualities （Excerpts from Mencius 6A7）. This example can be used to apply to the advantages of regarding shrinkage at a company. Shrinkage is a series of disloyal acts including employee theft， shoplifting， vendor fraud， and administrative error （The Case of the Comparison of Costco to Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Club P83）. Low inventory shrinkage means the employees are working willingly and in rules. The atmosphere of a workforce is constructed by all the staff in the company. If the CEO creates a remarkably positive working place for his or her employees， both of them can benefit from it. A company like Costco which is run in a benevolent way with less shrinkage enjoys low employee turnover will make the whole working process more stable and efficient as well as the company security is more ensured. Only in this way does a company provide high-quality productions and services in long-term.
Mencius encouraged the king to run his kingdom according to a theory of treating those irrelevant commoners like his own family. He thought only in this way can the empire be managed harmoniously （Excerpts from Mencius 1A7， 6/24/2014）. Costco unknowingly follows his ideas. The working motivation of the employees in Costco is from high wages and secured welfares. It has been reported that， from time to time， many of workers in the U.S. drift into daydreams and wonder what it must be like to work for Ferrari where the workforce， wages and welfare are available all the time. According to the Great Place to Work Institute， which named the company Best Place to Work in Europe for 2007， Ferrari got voted （Ferrari， Paradise： Ferrari Named the Best Place to Work， 2007）. Ferrari created a people-centered workforce for its employees so that they could put all their heart into their work to help the company progress. Costco has been treating its employees better than its own shareholders， which has been questioned by lots of economic experts. However， Costco receives more benefits than the other companies by doing this. The high wages makes sure that the employees will stay in the company when the secured welfares keep them having faith in their workplace. That helps lessen shrinkage and drives the company functioning well. Besides， Costco also use internal promotion to maintain its officials and their loyalty （The Case of the Comparison of Costco to Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Club P83-84）.
Costco treats its partners including suppliers， the Unions and customers. They are all essential to Costco’s success. By doing this， Costco can help itself and lots of laborers in different industries which also benefits the whole society. Costco gets along well with its suppliers by doing civilized business with them to make sure of having handful sources so that it can provide enough products to its “gods”， customers. Costco sticks to the extremely-low-price strategy coming from legal bargain with its suppliers to wow its customers which increases the number of their purchasing （The Case of the Comparison of Costco to Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Club P84-85）. People are always looking for bargains. Faithful customers are the energy of keeping a company alive so that it can continue doing business with its suppliers. It’s benevolent to keep good relationships with every helpful concerned part. A CEO who pays attention to do that can always put his or her company in a good situation with constant resources. If there are some crises coming up to the company， it is more likely to receive assistance from the people that it has helped.
On the other hand， if a business is not run in a benevolent way it may face lots of problems after a thriving in the short-term.
In Wal-Mart uses low price strategy as well to attract customers as well and it has succeeded. Nevertheless， it manages it by cutting every dime it uses， by any means， including blackmailing suppliers， reducing wages and lowering production quality （The Case of the Comparison of Costco to Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Club P79）. What Wal-Mart has been doing is obviously not benevolent. This way can help a company win for a short time but it doesn’t look good for the further development. “Owning the firm” means not only chasing benefits but also having a concomitant responsibility for the uses of their property （The Case of “Managing for Stakeholders” P62）. Wal-Mart is like being an arrogant king， who just wants to dominate his kingdom despite of any price. Mencius said if a leader always thought about profit， all his followers might always think about profit （Excerpts from Mencius 1A1）. This kind of leadership makes the whole company running in a fairly unstable condition which may involves more crimes， disloyalty and cheating among the employees if more profit is needed. It strongly attacks its own “admirable values”： hard work， discipline， modesty， unpretentiousness， and frugality. Its violence leads to self doom and brings up lots of criticism. A company with potential unlawful practice can only do harm to itself.
To drop charges， Wal-Mart pays a large amount of funds to comfort people or maybe offers bribes to calm things down instead of changing its immoral strategy. The Ford company also did the same to fix the accidents that caused by the internal flaws of their own productions. Ford victims’ suffering with money or numbers and wanted to cover its car problems this way （W. Michael Hoffman， Case Study - The Ford Pinto）. However， companies make promises to customers via their advertising， and when products or services don’t match these promises， and then the leader has the responsibility to rectify the situation （The Case of “Managing for Stakeholders” P63）”. To the companies who make a good fortune despite of the problem of their products， if they just keep using money to bury their latent danger， there might be further more accidents which will lead to trust issues among customers. If a leader always judges things using money， he or she may damage the company culture. Based on Mencius’s theory， in that case， the CEO is like the bad farmer who damaged the nutrition inside the soil. The view of “money only” without caring about collaborate damages may be spread out from the CEO to all staff below. The employees’ hearts will be starved or even corrupted through lack of proper atmosphere emotionally. The buyers are more likely to get suspicious of the mode of business operation of the company and finally just no longer want to purchase its products.
Wal-Mart’s negative attitude towards its employees （long working time， low wages， less social welfare） causes lots of problems. Firstly， the company may face employee turnover so high that they have to spend a large amount of time and money to fix it. In a highly developed country like the U.S.， training a new employee to play fluently with modern working tools may take weeks or months as well as the training fee is not a small number. Secondly， its actions damage the purchasing power and standards of living of the U.S. workers. Nevertheless， as the leader of a promising company， he or she should take the responsibility of concerning both the enterprise itself and the people relating to it. If a CEO just considers about the profit of the company， he or she is failing the society.
In Guangzhou， China， one of the top enterprises in the nation， Foxconn， which is also the world's largest electronics contractor manufacturer， shocked the whole country by treating unfairly to its employees with 18 of which attempted suicide to protest low wages in 2010. The tragedy of these 18 young people raised a huge rage in the public. As if to make the condition better， the company put up safety net instead （What Happened after the Foxconn Suicides CBS News， 2010）. It was obviously non humanity！ Mencius claimed that people who were unfeeling to the others in trouble were hardly real human （Excerpts from Mencius 2A6）. After that， Foxconn jumps became the target of criticism. Running business on the foundation of suffering of people is equal to invade the public justice. Moreover， it’s a kind of crime that deteriorates the life standard of the average workers in the society. Customers are getting wondering how the products they are using were made. So what’s the point for a well-known company to do nothing good to the majority but spread out negative energy？ Fortune doesn’t mean everything.
In conclusion， Mencius suggested his king to rule the empire in a benevolent way. If the king followed， the kingdom would be in harmony and rich. Comparing Costco to Wal-Mart with Mencius’s theory， we can see Costco proves itself with running business in a benevolent way even though its shareholders are only rich on the paper while Wal-Mart is caught in a dilemma. Although it seems unfair that Costco are being questioned for thinking the best for its employees and customers， it is just like good things are a long time in coming. What Costco do were too standout among the hungry entrepreneurs but its new strategy will prove them wrong by helping the company wining in a long-term.