Debate Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Debate Paper - Essay Example The certificate must bear the signature of a sole incorporator, whose main objective is to establish the corporation. The Articles generally specify the name of the business, the chosen capital stock structure, the objective of the corporation, and the formal location of the headquarters and agent(s) of the corporation. After all that, the sole incorporator should formalize the appointment of the initial company directors by signing a consent document. Corporations such as Food Mart Stores are normally established to advance the business interests of the shareholders and cushion them against any liability. As such Smith owes a duty to the company’s stakeholders: the investors, directors, employees, and Stone Hill customers. Nonetheless, he is confronted with a delicate situation that could see the company make more profits by opening a bigger store farther away for the neighborhood at the expense of the locals. Different ethical theories manifest in this case study with regard to the impending decision on whether or not to close the store. Firstly, utilitarian ethical principle focuses on implementing ethical decisions that would maximize the good or value within the society while ensuring that the end result harms as few individuals as possible (Shaw, 2010). In this case, two issues prop up in the analysis of the best utilitarian action that Smith should take: on the one hand, the geriatrics who cannot carry heavy loads over long distances on foot make up about 10 percent of the population. Moreover, the average income of the lower-end segment in the neighborhood population depending on the Food Mart Store is $15,000, a figure that is lower than that of the city residents. On the other hand, Food Mart Stores and Smith face a gloom future if no action is taken to expand the store for stocking of a wide range of goods. With a gross income of a paltry 2%, the corporation’s operations could grind to a halt if it heeded the cry of the local population advocating for the retaining of the status quo, or worse still, engage in a costly renovation exercise whose returns on investment would be too little to imagine. Moreover, the future of Smith at the helm of the company hangs on the balance as the level of profits generated by the corporation continues to decline. Having done adequate research on the positive prospects of opening a larger store stocked with a variety of goods, it is ethical of Smith to press for the closure of the two smaller stores in order to pave way for the establishment of a bigger one that would guarantee all the stakeholders better outcomes. In essence, the new store will provide low prices on goods for patrons; and ensure higher profitability and continued existence to the benefit of all the stakeholders. A utilitarian-driven action by Smith would definitely cause suffering to the old residents of Stone Hill, however their suffering would be insignificant because they are a paltry10 percent of the populatio n. The poorer residents have reasonable incomes (of $15,000) which would enable them to adjust if a new store was established a few miles away from the neighborhood. Secondly, a rights ethical principle comes to fore in this dilemma. It is premised upon the notion that all stakeholders in a company have rights which