The firm theoretically encourages individual social responsibility on the part of its employees by encouraging political action, but without requiring a particular ideological point-of-view to be supported. As a company, Microsoft is socially responsive in its philanthropic as well as capitalist in its use of largess of funds. The philanthropic as well as the capitalist mission of the company fosters life-improving technical communication, education, and development. The firm supports education in high schools, and also computers have emerged as means of education and connection to enhance the lives and minds of many people. But a rival computer firm might contend that Microsoft has accomplished this in a monopolistic way that stifles the creativity of rival firms, and could squash the inroads new ideas could make in the market to improve computers and education in the future.

Thus, the dominance of the firm in the market structure may be socially irresponsible or counterproductive in terms of curtailing costs for its products, needlessly gouging consumers and acting unfairly against rival firms. For a business to be socially responsible it must fulfill its obligations to its employees, shareholders, consumers, and to the community where it operates at large. Microsoft provides quality salaries, benefits, and the ability to engage in intellectually rewarding work to its employees. It has enriched its shareholders as well as its founder many times over. Consumers, however, may be paying more than they ought, because of the company's monopoly in the market, its ubiquity in home and office work (one must know Windows on a basic level to get virtually any office job in the country, if not the world) and its use of proprietary software.

As for the community, the question remains open if the corporate fostering of technical innovation within the company and its philanthropy around the world through its largess 'makes up' for creating...

Microsoft states as well that it has worked with the government to stem hackers and security impingements, but outside of the company, the Microsoft system's impingements from security threats, thus posing a community danger to user information, privacy, and the finances of business that use Microsoft, remains a topic of open debate. ("Trustworthy Computing," 2004)
Are the firm's philanthropic activities strategic? Explain.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation promotes such international efforts as the international vaccination of children, educational initiatives and grants to deserving students and schools, and the housing of needy families in the Washington D.C. area. Although a cynic might see this as a 'slight of hand' to cover up company abuses, it should be underlined that none of these initiatives are specifically aimed at promoting the Microsoft brand -- the vaccines are not branded with the Microsoft logo, the transforming High Schools program does not require high schools to ban Apple Macintoshes from the buildings (as similar promotional and financial agreements between Coca-Cola have required Pepsi branded vending machines to be removed from participating schools).

If there is any strategic interest, it is improving the Microsoft name in a very general way, increasing name recognition, and creating a better-educated workforce for American companies, including Microsoft, into the next millennium. (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, 2005)

Works Cited

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (11 Feb 2005) Retrieved 13 Feb 2005. http://www.gatesfoundation.org

Microsoft Corporation. (4 May 2003) "Microsoft Standards of Business Conduct." Retrieved 13 Feb 2005. http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/legal/buscond/

Microsoft Corporation. (2004) "Trustworthy Computing." Retrieved 13 Feb 2005. http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/twc/default.mspx