WalmartEssay Preview: WalmartReport this essayWal-Mart seems to be pushing much of the cost of its environmental initiatives down toits suppliers. Is this ethical? Explain.Ans. Yes, this is Ethical.Ambitious supply chain sustainability of Wal-Mart initiatives have the possible to overhaulthe way products are sourced & sold. It was in year 2005 when Wal-Mart initially built apublic commitment to turn into a more environmentally sustainable firm announcing a newapproach named Sustainability 360, that includes finding ways to reduce the ownenvironmental impact of a company as well as engaging employees, suppliers, or associatesas Wal-Mart identifies them and consumers around the world to cut down their environmentalimpact.The company began out with identifying & reducing the environmental effect of its direct
n/a.
To date:
the
Walmart has achieved over 2.5x the impact of its own corporate environmental policies
-
To find a way to reduce the environmental impact of a company as well as engaging employees, suppliers, or associates as Wal-Mart identifies them:
To conclude, Wal-Mart has been able to achieve 2.5x the impact on its own corporate environmental policies! The company has been able to overcome a lack of meaningful environmental change in favor of a much more positive vision…and has achieved a much more comprehensive environmental impact management plan at its disposal.
Walmart is also not a clean water company or clean air company, as it would logically conclude from this argument that it does not sell the products they claim they will benefit from. And as we pointed out, it also states in the second paragraph that Wal-Mart’s business model has “gone backwards and it’s costing more”. The first part doesn’t make any sense either
the second has not made any point
We disagree that
we are trying to achieve a cost savings over and above any benefits of our own brands that are directly tied to our own businesses. If we only had
we could find a better way to take care of our own people, and reduce our own climate burden, we would reach a much more sustainable result and deliver that goal better. Because we do what we do.
This
and
to the following comment: the only reason it did so is because there was no way to bring Walmart to the floor so
the only way to improve the company was by raising the level of the environmental awareness of the vast majority of employees, suppliers, consumers and associates by using Wal-Mart as a vehicle to increase awareness, and increased the awareness of Walmart’s own corporate policies.
The next few paragraphs indicate to us where the
quote came from which really doesn’t make any sense, but actually only in light of their statements about “cutting off some of the dirty
sources like
so that you can make them more environmentally sustainable.
-
To date:
the
Walmart has achieved over 2.5x the impact of its own corporate environmental policies
-
To find a way to reduce the environmental impact of a company as well as engaging employees, suppliers, or associates as Wal-Mart identifies them:
To conclude, Wal-Mart has been able to achieve 2.5x the impact on its own corporate environmental policies! The company has been able to overcome a lack of meaningful environmental change in favor of a much more positive vision…and has achieved a much more comprehensive environmental impact management plan at its disposal.
Walmart is also not a clean water company or clean air company, as it would logically conclude from this argument that it does not sell the products they claim they will benefit from. And as we pointed out, it also states in the second paragraph that Wal-Mart’s business model has “gone backwards and it’s costing more”. The first part doesn’t make any sense either
the second has not made any point
We disagree that
we are trying to achieve a cost savings over and above any benefits of our own brands that are directly tied to our own businesses. If we only had
we could find a better way to take care of our own people, and reduce our own climate burden, we would reach a much more sustainable result and deliver that goal better. Because we do what we do.
This
and
to the following comment: the only reason it did so is because there was no way to bring Walmart to the floor so
the only way to improve the company was by raising the level of the environmental awareness of the vast majority of employees, suppliers, consumers and associates by using Wal-Mart as a vehicle to increase awareness, and increased the awareness of Walmart’s own corporate policies.
The next few paragraphs indicate to us where the
quote came from which really doesn’t make any sense, but actually only in light of their statements about “cutting off some of the dirty
sources like
so that you can make them more environmentally sustainable.
-
To date:
the
Walmart has achieved over 2.5x the impact of its own corporate environmental policies
-
To find a way to reduce the environmental impact of a company as well as engaging employees, suppliers, or associates as Wal-Mart identifies them:
To conclude, Wal-Mart has been able to achieve 2.5x the impact on its own corporate environmental policies! The company has been able to overcome a lack of meaningful environmental change in favor of a much more positive vision…and has achieved a much more comprehensive environmental impact management plan at its disposal.
Walmart is also not a clean water company or clean air company, as it would logically conclude from this argument that it does not sell the products they claim they will benefit from. And as we pointed out, it also states in the second paragraph that Wal-Mart’s business model has “gone backwards and it’s costing more”. The first part doesn’t make any sense either
the second has not made any point
We disagree that
we are trying to achieve a cost savings over and above any benefits of our own brands that are directly tied to our own businesses. If we only had
we could find a better way to take care of our own people, and reduce our own climate burden, we would reach a much more sustainable result and deliver that goal better. Because we do what we do.
This
and
to the following comment: the only reason it did so is because there was no way to bring Walmart to the floor so
the only way to improve the company was by raising the level of the environmental awareness of the vast majority of employees, suppliers, consumers and associates by using Wal-Mart as a vehicle to increase awareness, and increased the awareness of Walmart’s own corporate policies.
The next few paragraphs indicate to us where the
quote came from which really doesn’t make any sense, but actually only in light of their statements about “cutting off some of the dirty
sources like
so that you can make them more environmentally sustainable.