It later developed to be the right thing commercially as well as ethically, for consumers responded well, and Tylenol quickly regained leadership in its market segment. There is another school of thought on this point. His argument is that profits are the result of efficiency in creating value, and permit paying dividends to investors who should be allowed to make their own choices of artists, charities, colleges, and other good causes to support. I can understand the pure logic of Professor Friedman s argument, but must respectfully disagree. Look at it from a practical point of view.
Business is subject to laws and regulations, to zoning board decisions and lawsuits.
A public perception that a company is a heartless, mindless, money-grubbing machine invites punitive treatment. And that cannot be in shareholders interest. The same perception inside the corporate wall invites cynicism and defections among employees. That cannot be in shareholders interest, either. The current plight of the tobacco industry largely self-created and richly deserved, in my opinion is good evidence on that point.