Homeworks academic service


Case study on dutch bangla bank limited

Research Paper Executive Summary In our country there are lots of organizations performed in the field of social activities and by increased their profit earning ratio, among them the Dutch-Bangla Bank is best performing in this field. So we have selected of this organization to conduct our correlation. We have taken some data as like profit earning ratio from —net profit data from —dividend per share and expenditure of Dutch-Bangla Bank Limited, which is expensed for the corporate social responsibility.

We have to find out the relationship between the corporate social responsibility and its influence on share price. Here, we need to construct 4 types of data table, we also focuses some literature review and history of Dutch-Bangla Bank Limited and its social activities. Here, we need to assign some numerals values that we discussed in our limitations. Companies, which are environmentally, concern to show the better performance in the profit earning ability.

As performances in the share market largely depend on the profit earning ability. The highest performing ability will achieve the higher rate of profit. Management of the companies wants to find out weather there is a significant relationship between environmental reporting and their performance in the share price.

Objective of the Study The purpose of this study is to find out the environmental reporting and its influence of share price. Actually we will study the level of environmental case study on dutch bangla bank limited and activities of Dutch-Bangla Bank Limited and its influence of share price and its relationship of international market price of share. Here, we also find out the correlation between the social activities and its influence on share price.

On the face of it, questioning the efforts of companies to behave responsibly is an odd thing to do—unless you are accusing them of faking it, or of falling below some commonly agreed minimum standard. How could a company ever behave too responsibly? No doubt that is why companies fasten the label to a quite bewildering variety of supposedly enlightened, progressive or charitable corporate actions. At one end of the broad span of CSR lie corporate policies that any well-run company ought to have in place anyway, policies that are called for on any sensible view of business ethics or good management practice.

These include not lying to your employees, for instance, not paying bribes, and looking farther case study on dutch bangla bank limited than the next few weeks. In other words, at the mild end of the range are practices that do not need any special CSR defense: At the strong end of the range, many activities do deserve a special label: But can the same be said of the policies?

At first sight that looks like a churlish question. What could possibly be wrong with policies such as corporate charity or careful attention to the demands of environmental protection and sustainable development?

Sometimes nothing, but it depends. Many individual acts of good corporate citizenship do make sense in business terms, or as ways of advancing the public good, or both. But others do not. There are some kindly CEOs out there, and some with a troubled conscience.

But there can be other motives for CSR too. There are quite a few vain CEOs who enjoy the attention which CSR leadership brings them, and many others who, having climbed their way to the top, seem to find running a profitable company too small a test of their talents. Yet whatever the variations, one thing is constant: Putting those arguments about the duties of business to one side for the moment, setting motives aside as well and thinking only of results, one might ask two questions of any act of supposedly enlightened corporate citizenship.

Assignment Point - Solution for Best Assignment Paper

And does it advance the broader public good? Two tests Successful managers usually do both at once, of course: This argument will be taken up in more detail below. Some of the business practices that are often perhaps misleadingly labelled as CSR do fall into this category: Examples include establishing a reputation for dealing honestly with employees, suppliers and customers.

This is the win-win kind of CSR—the sort that fails to impress much of civil society. Turning back to those two questions, however, note that there are three other possible answers as well. These are mapped out in the table. Some kinds of CSR reduce profits but raise social welfare this is what civil society likes best: There is a lot of it about. Many executives in the CSR movement deserve credit for testing and drawing attention to novel practices that can yield these good results.

Their ideas may not be applicable in all or even most companies, but their success in particular cases is impressive. One of the most enthusiastic and persuasive evangelists of win-win CSR is Marc Benioff, head of salesforce. In complementary ways, it also provides flexibility in working hours and conditions. The character of the firm, as perceived by its employees and its customers alike, is closely associated with this commitment to good causes.

All this seems to pay. Mr Benioff argues that this draws the right kind case study on dutch bangla bank limited people to the firm—team players, joiners, volunteers, generous and committed colleagues with a sense of loyalty to the enterprise. This kind of corporate philanthropy, which marries good works with a clever way of sorting and motivating staff, is undoubtedly catching on. But those other cells of the matrix are far from empty. A clear instance of an action that reduces profits while presumably improving social welfare is a straightforward cash donation to charity.

The donations featured in the Giving List fall into this category. Sums donated in this way have soared recently in response to the Asian tsunami.

You might suppose that devoting profit to the public interest is CSR at its best, or at any rate its noblest. The enlightened company is surrendering some of its earnings to make the world a better place.

Only people can have responsibilities. The first step toward clarity in examining the doctrine of the social responsibility of business is to ask precisely what it implies for whom. Most of the discussion of social responsibility is directed at corporations, so in what follows I shall mostly neglect the individual proprietors and speak of corporate executives.

Of course, in some cases his employers may have a different objective. The manager of such a corporation will not have money profit as his objective but the rendering of certain services. In either case, the key point is that, in his capacity as a corporate executive, the manager is the agent of the individuals who own the corporation or establish the eleemosynary institution, and his primary responsibility is to them.

Needless to say, this does not mean that it is easy to judge how well he is performing his task. But at least the criterion of performance is straightforward, and the persons among whom a voluntary contractual arrangement exists are clearly defined. Of course, the corporate executive is also a person in his own right.

If this statement is not pure rhetoric, it must mean that he is to act in some way that is not in the interest of his employers. For example, that he is to refrain from increasing the price of the product in order to contribute to the social objective of preventing inflation, even though a price in crease would be in the best interests of the corporation.

Insofar as his actions lower the wages of some employees, he is spending their money. The stockholders or the customers or the employees could separately spend their own money on the particular action if they wished to do so. But if he does this, he is in effect imposing taxes, on the one hand, and deciding how the tax proceeds shall be spent, on the other. This process raises political questions on two levels: He is to decide whom to tax by how much and for what purpose, and he is to spend the proceeds—all this guided only by general exhortations from on high to restrain inflation, improve the environment, fight poverty and so on and on.

The whole justification for permitting the corporate executive to be selected by the stockholders is that the executive is an agent serving the interests of his principal.

He becomes in effect a public employee, a civil servant, even though he remains in name an employee of a private enterprise. If they are to be civil servants, then they must be elected through a political process. How is he to know how to spend it? He is told that he must contribute to fighting inflation. He is presumably an expert in running his company—in case study on dutch bangla bank limited a product or selling it or financing it.

But nothing about his selection makes him an expert on inflation. Or, by leaving more spending power in the hands of his customers, simply divert it elsewhere?

Assignment Point - Solution for Best Assignment Paper

Or, by forcing him to produce less because of the lower price, will it simply contribute to shortages? Will not the stockholders fire him? The conflict of interest is naked and clear when union officials are asked to subordinate the interest of their members to some more general purpose. We thus have the ironic phenomenon that union leaders—at least in the U.

They can do good—but only at their own expense. M crusade for example. The case study on dutch bangla bank limited of the individual proprietor is somewhat different. Of course, in practice the doctrine of social responsibility is frequently a cloak for actions that are justified on other grounds rather than a reason for those actions. To illustrate, it may well be in the long run interest of a corporation that is a major employer in a small community to devote resources to providing amenities to that community or to improving its government.

That may make it easier to attract desirable employees, it may reduce the wage bill or lessen losses from pilferage and sabotage or have other worthwhile effects. At the same time, I can express admiration for those individual proprietors or owners of closely held corporations or stockholders of more broadly held corporations who disdain such tactics as approaching fraud.

Assignment Point - Solution for Best Assignment Paper

I have been impressed time and again by the schizophrenic character of many businessmen. They are capable of being extremely farsighted and clearheaded in matters that are internal to their businesses. This shortsightedness is strikingly exemplified in the calls from many businessmen for wage and price guidelines or controls or income policies.

This may gain them kudos in the short run. But it helps to strengthen the already too prevalent view that the pursuit of profits is wicked and immoral and must be curbed and controlled by external forces.

Once this view is adopted, the external forces that curb the market will not be the social consciences, however highly developed, of the pontificating executives; it will be the iron fist of Government bureaucrats.

Assignment Point - Solution for Best Assignment Paper

Here, as with price and wage controls, businessmen seem to me to reveal a suicidal impulse. The political principle that underlies the market mechanism is unanimity. Society is a collection of individuals and of the various groups they voluntarily form.