Google And The Boys And Girls Club Case Study

Ethics and Values of Google and the Boys & Girls Club
Justin Williamson
PHI 445
Instructor Al-Amin
08/17/13

In our world, what is morally and ethically acceptable for one man may not be the same viewpoint held by another man. In any organization the driving force behind the mission and vision should be its ethics and morals. For any company to be successful, they must practice what is defined as good ethics, while exemplifying the utmost values of all of its competitors. The likelihood of a for-profit organization practicing poor ethics is generally higher than that of a not-for-profit organization. Not-for-profit organizations serve our communities and countries in some way with an emphasis on bettering society,
while for-profit organizations serve society by providing jobs, products, services, and revenue. Some for-profit corporations like Google are adapting to ethical principles and values around the world, while not-for-profit companies like Boys & Girls Clubs of America focus on domestic ethical principles and values that aid our communities in more ways than one. In the following paragraphs, the organizational profiles, values, ethics, and morals will be discussed and contrasted. Boys & Girls Clubs of America have been serving our communities for over 150 years. Boys & Girls Clubs serve our communities by promoting and enhancing “the development of boys and girls by instilling a sense of competence, usefulness, belonging and influence. Boys & Girls Clubs are a safe place to learn and grow – all while having fun. It is the place where great futures are started each and every day” (bgca.org, 2013). This not-for-profit organization was established in 1860 by 3 women who wanted more for young boys who were roaming the streets with no recreational activities to participate. Other boys club affiliations merged their organizations with this “Boy Club Federation” over the next 50 years. Holding several different titles over the years, the organization eventually decided to change its name to Boys & Girls Clubs of America in order to recognize young girls as part of their cause. B&G Clubs continually provide many programs and opportunities to include: education, career, character, leadership, health & life skills, arts, sports, fitness, recreation, and specialized programs. With 3,985 clubs, Boys & Girls Clubs of America receives its funding from the government and various sponsors to include Coca-Cola, Comcast, Microsoft, and the United States Military. Boys & Girls Clubs of America serve our communities with a mission statement: “to enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens” (bgca.org, 2013). Its National Headquarters are located in Atlanta, Georgia with major branch offices in Chicago, Dallas, Ney York City, Los Angeles, and Washington DC. BGCA is a tax-exempt organization who ensures sponsors contributions and taxpayer dollars are properly utilized and applied in the most efficient manner to support the organizations cause and mission. With over 295,000 employees, the company is made up of many volunteers and paid employees. BGCA does not face any obstacles in its sector currently, but face obstacles within the community. BGCA continues to open more clubs and take on new challenges by accepting the problems within the communities that they serve. They have taken innovative approaches to ensure kids receive computer and internet access, while guaranteeing they have a safe place to play sports and congregate with other children. Overall, the company itself has not faced large challenges. Individual clubs have faced problems in their communities more so than the company as a whole. In 2006, The BGCA in Waterloo was facing major problems as they were facing major deficits that had been growing for several years. The club was facing closure until BGCA committee members acted in the best interest of the community. To act quickly, BGCA employees and community members “formed and vowed to keep the club 's doors open and to continue to serve the estimated 1,500 mostly underprivileged youth the agency serves annually, in a host of programs ranging from computer training to youth basketball” (Kinney, 2006). The committee raised funds, worked with creditors, reviewed and fixed financials, and put plans into place for club improvement. New management options were explored, and club committee members secured $50,000 in emergency club funding from BGCA headquarters. Additional funding was provided by the Waterloo-based Guernsey Foundation in the amount of $20,000, and $50,000 was donated by United Way. Fortunately, no wrongdoing was identified in the crisis that was averted in Waterloo. In 2009, the Daphne, Alabama Boys & Girls Club faced crisis relating to its budget for the upcoming year. The club decided to turn to the city of Daphne for assistance by seeking financial support from the city council. The club reported to the council that they were in need of funds of $100,000 in order to continue to operate the club. Budget challenges are only going to get worse for not-for-profit companies like Boys & Girls Clubs of America. Due to the current problems within the American economy, BGCA has continually faced less annual federal funding due to rising government pressure. Pressure and funding problems exist due to constant discussions about tax breaks for the rich and big write offs for donations from contributing companies. Government aid is also being pressured into reduction due to more citizens being involved in the knowledge of where tax dollars are going. Our current administration has been pressuring a change in policy to require big contributors to write off more donations by spending money on fighting poverty instead of contributing to community organizations. These problems have impacted BGCA by reducing the amount of government spending and donations given to the non-profit organization via donations. BGCA have spent millions of dollars over the years lobbying for more financial support as promised by the government. This impact can be seen at local clubs and across the country. Some clubs have been forced to close due to the lack of funding. In both the Waterloo and Daphne crises, local Boys & Girls Clubs called out to the community for help. The fact that their organizations faced eventual closing sparked a dire need for change. The clubs looked to the communities they serve to give back. Once the public got word of the money crisis in both of these situations, the community realized they must band together to lend a helping hand. Talk of wrongdoing and possible criminal activity was most likely spoken of throughout both of these communities, but no suspicious activity has been reported. Although suspicious activity did not drive the ethical dilemmas faced by the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, it surely drives all legal implications facing for-profit companies like Google, Inc.

Google.com is the world’s most widely used internet search engine. Google aims to put information into the hands of those who need it into a single mouse click. In 1995, two aspiring Stanford students conjured up the idea of a search engine that is now called Google. With more than 30,000 employees, Google’ mission is to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” (Google, 2013). Google’s major startup investment came from Sun co-founder Andy Bechtolsheim in the amount of $100,000. Google went public by offering their stock on the NASDAQ in 2004. Google’s primary source of income has generally been advertising. Google is not only just a search engine these days, it offers toolbars, internet browsers, maps, books, media purchasing, voice services, translation, email, and many other exciting features. Google’s purchase of YouTube in 2006 was a major part in bringing personal and professional video streaming to the sites realm. Google, Inc. also offers a variety of services for businesses online. One of the initial means for Google’s success was their use of what is called “adwords.” Additionally, Google utilizes further ad technology to charge companies that place ads on their pages based off of the amount of viewers that have seen or reviewed the ad. An additional revenue strategy according to MacFarlane is the idea of AdSense, where “rather than having ads appear on search pages accessed upon visiting Google.com, AdSense allows owners of other websites to join Google 's network and run Google-branded ads. Google 's algorithms do all the work, too. Sign up for the network and your website devoted to Bikram yoga might end up running ads for mats, props, etc. Companies that pay Google to run those ads indirectly benefit site owners who use AdSense” (Google, 2012). 96% of Google’s revenues are due to advertising, but the company has recently acquired Motorola Mobility, a cell phone producer. Google’s latest product features a tablet with the Google operating system. Google’s headquarters is in Mountain View, CA with many other branch locations in Ann Arbor, Atlanta, Austin, Boulder, Chicago, Birmingham, Irvine, Kirkland, Los Angeles, Madison, New York City, and many other domestic locations. Internationally, Google now has offices in more than 40 countries around the globe.

Google’s most recent revenues can be seen in their financial tables that are broken down by full year and quarter. In 2013, quarter 2, Google made $8.8 billion dollars from websites alone. Google’s other revenues for Q2 include $3.1B from network members websites, $12B from advertising, $1B from other avenues, and $998B from Motorola Mobile. In the profits margin, Google made $3.1B from operations, lost $342M from Motorola Mobile, and had a net income from continuing operations of $2.5B. In relation to its revenue and profit, Google has continually grown from year to year, and even quarter to quarter. Big expectations have been set over the years for higher stock earnings with sometimes no drastic increase at once, but the company continues to perform well. Google is not only the top performer in its sector, it’s one of the top employers in the world. The average salary of Google employees in 2011 was reported to be $141,000. Quality of life, benefits, and company perks are only a few of the things that are impressive at Google. On average, Google pays its staff “23% more than workers are paid for similar roles at rival technology companies, according to the PayScale survey. In January Google gave all its employees a $1,000 tax-free bonus and a 10% pay rise to stop staff defecting to rivals, such as Facebook” (theguardian, 2011). Although attempts have been made to prove that the search engine features provided by Google are a utility that is required for internet usage, Google continues to prove their competitiveness and worthiness. Google has the most innovative features integrated into their search engines and companies technologies. They are continuing to innovate and invest in quality products to remain competitive.

Google does not really face any major obstacles in its sector as a search engine seeing as there really is no threat to them as being the best provider. The company has begun selling cellular phones and tablets through newly acquired companies, and has begun to face all sorts of new problems with competition on that playing field. Google uses the strength of its people to overcome and adapt to the changing world of technology. With Google’s acquisition of the restaurant review company Zagat and other acquisition of ITA Software, Google confused many investors and technologists. With this, it is said that Google is “extending its presence in so-called ‘verticals’ in search, such as travel, news, video, mapping and more - competing with other providers in those verticals. The Internet giant is intentionally blurring the line between offering a neutral, unbiased search engine for web links and promoting its increasing arsenal of content in various verticals - creating a conflict of identity in the process” (Pinter-Krainer, 2011). Many competitors are furious over this, but must realize that Google has to seek an interest in their own monetary values in order to remain competitive and successful in the technology sector. Google executives acknowledge this type of activity and continue to explain their reasoning behind the purchases and decisions through press releases and newspaper articles.

Google is currently facing numerous dilemmas regarding censorship, government intervention, and privacy issues. All of these problems exist because of competing businesses online, consumer interest, and different privacy acts around the world. Censorship problems have been a major issue for Google since approximately 2004. Since then, the problems have gotten larger with approximately 25 countries restricting access to Google over the years. Personal privacy issues have been discussed and identified since approximately 2010. Currently, France and five other EU nations have issued a deadline to Google demanding drastic changes are made to ensure users are aware of their privacy and how it is impacted. Fines and legal actions have been imposed on Google by various organizations and governments in an effort to make their point and penalize Google for wrongdoing. These problems have impacted Google in a positive manner. It’s not likely that Bing or some other search engine is going to be able to surpass the amount of users that Google receives each day, so Google takes action against the claims and if they are in the wrong Google works to correct the problem. There is plenty of negative conversations regarding Google, but an alternative search engine provider has not prevailed in the manner that Google has. The US government has not stepped into the international cases with the EU, and Google has not met the requirements laid out for them at this time. Google does continue to make the suggested and recommended changes that are required of them in order to fix specific situations. In legal situations, Google has won and lost cases.

Boys & Girls Clubs of America across the United States have been facing reduced federal funding over the past decade.
The actions that were taken in both Waterloo and Daphne were morally responsible. No wrongdoing was found in both situations, but negligence and a lack of community support led to the crises. Both clubs fell into this ethical dilemma which required them to seek community and headquarters support in order to stay afloat. This created a situation where clubs were immediately investigated for suspicious activity as they were viewed differently by the public eye. The government is definitely to blame for lower funding. Those who lobby in favor to reduce spending to the BGCA as well as other not-for-profit organizations have a major impact on funding and community support. Waterloo and Daphne local clubs could have forecasted reduced funding and planned more to ensure continued local fundraising and community support, so they actually also add to the overall money crises. The federal government should stop throwing millions of dollars at for-profit companies to pull them out of debt. They can also stop being involved in starter companies and making large assumptions by gracefully backing them with millions of dollars. BGCA can work together as an organization and develop better spending habits, community fundraising programs, and local government support programs. Amidst less federal funding and government pressure, the government can work
together with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America in assisting local clubs and communities. BGCA as an organization can develop better spending habits, community fundraising programs and local government support programs. This is the best long term solution to government pressure and less funding. By developing long term funding programs in the local community, the clubs will create an even stronger community dependence, and federal government funding will not be needed as highly. Federal government funding will continue obviously, but the organization will only benefit from becoming more self-reliable through stronger community support programs. Google continues to fight small battles where the company’s ethics and principles are called into question. The issues that Google faces are not necessarily morally irresponsible. Googles policies and practices are always aimed at providing information to each of its users while adhering to current laws. Across the globe laws and privacy acts are written differently and are enforced in different manners. Google is definitely to blame for the problems and dilemmas that they have created as they have failed to fully understand and incorporate all international policies. With regards to personal privacy, competitive businesses and government organizations are also to blame for these problems for not implementing specific privacy acts and guidelines for all websites when allowing them to enter websites. Personal privacy ultimately rests with the user themselves. Users must ensure that they are fully aware of all risks associated with any and all online activity on their own behalf. In order to prevent future dilemmas, Google must work with lawyers and legal advisors to ensure the best possible courses of action to avoid legal difficulties. With regards to privacy issues, Google can ensure its users are advised of all content and risks they are taking by accessing sites that are accessed via google searches. This can be done through the use of advisories posted on the main page or a warning that pops up as soon as the site is accessed as seen on government websites. Google can continue to monitor and research website criteria and their content. This is the best possible course of action for Google to take regarding privacy issues as well as the smartest choice. This is completely possible, and will drive the future for privacy concerns for the company as well as the rest of the internet. The United States Government must do more to ensure that American Companies such as Google are not breaking any foreign laws. If illegal activity has occurred, the US Government should handle the activity to prevent it from happening in international cyberspace again. The actions of the not-for-profit organization Boys & Girls Clubs of America in both the Daphne and Waterloo financial crises were taken with the best interest of the children of the local communities.
BGCA followed the principles of the ethical theory of utilitarianism to not only to put themselves into the situation, but also to pull themselves out of it. The second component of utilitarianism focuses “on the consequences of happiness and unhappiness. While businesses assess costs and benefits in terms of financial gains and losses, utilitarianism focuses instead on how our actions affect human happiness” (Fieser & Mosley, 2012). From this aspect, local clubs got themselves into the problems that they were in by focusing on bettering the community. By following the third component of utilitarianism, BGCA utilized a more natural way for moral assessments and business decisions. They sought out the greatest good for the greatest number of people and identified the problems that existed. In doing this, Boys & Girls Club identified the need for help and assistance. By following this ethical principle on the issue, BGCA did not allow the clubs to fail and kept the best interest of the children and the community in mind. The easy way out would have been to just accept the overall failure of the organization and close the club. The solution to the financial crises in both the Waterloo and Daphne clubs couldn’t have been handled any better. The clubs sought out the
community for assistance and received amazing support from the people whom they serve every day. Boys & Girls Clubs should always act in the best interest of the community, but should still be concerned about financials and funding. BGCA is the prime example of an ethical business with many good hearted people at the center of the organization. They continue to make a lasting impact on children across the country. Google has proved to the world time and again that they are one of the best corporations to work for. One of the major factors leading to this conclusion is the ethics that the company practices. Google seems to adhere to the principles of the virtue ethics theory in that it focuses on the positive character traits that its employees acquire. The workplace is empowered by the knowledge and abilities of its workers and this is what paves the way for innovative ideas at Google. The actions taken by Google, Inc. in their personal privacy cases, censorship, and biased search provider claims were in line with the philosophical theory moral relativism. Google recognized that moral standards are created by humans, and that they differ from one society to the next. Google accepts the fact that not all countries share the same concepts as the United States, and that they may have very well been in the wrong. Google has taken on both of these ethical principles to only better itself domestically and internationally. The company has expanded its reach to more than 40 countries, and has begun transitioning into a more global scene. With corporate locations around the world, Google is becoming the most diverse and powerful company in technology in all of the world. Google’s handlings with the cases discussed as well as all other privacy, censorship, and bias cases, are in keeping with the standards and visions of the company and are in the best interest of internet users. To maintain their competitive edge while providing quality service to its customers and businesses, Google must continue to adhere to international policies while accepting that there will be more problems like this in the future. The strengths of its employees and diversity of the workforce through globalization have made them stronger, and will continue to reduce the blurred international policies and laws. In any organization the driving force behind the mission and vision should be its ethics and morals. For any company to be successful, they must practice what is defined as good ethics, while exemplifying the utmost values of all of its competitors. Both of these organizations serve our country in some way by providing services. Some for-profit corporations like Google are adapting to ethical principles and values around the world, while not-for-profit companies like Boys & Girls Clubs of America focus on domestic ethical principles and values that aid our communities in more ways than one. The organizational profiles, values, ethics, and morals are what make these two companies unique, and what continue to make them successful.

References
Fieser, J. & Moseley, A. (2012). Introduction to business ethics. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Bgca.org. (2013). Boys and Girls Club of America. Bgca.org. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from: http://www.bgca.org/Pages/index.aspx
Kinney, P. (2006). BREAKING: Boys and Girls Club in money crisis. WCF Courier. Retrieved from: http://wcfcourier.com/news/breaking_news/breaking-boys-girls-club-in-money-crisis/article_21c53561-9a63-5d67-ac5d-1b4dcd5b3b89.html
Tate, H., & Cowart, T. (2009, February 16). Boys & Girls club faces being shut down. FOX10tv. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from: http://www.fox10tv.com/news/boysandgirlsclubfacesbeingshutdown
Cermak, J., & McGurk, M. (2010). The Boys & Girls Clubs of America put a value on training. Mckinsey Quarterly, (4), 108-111.
Fredricks, J. A., Hackett, K., & Bregman, A. (2010). Participation in boys and girls clubs: motivation and stage environment fit. Journal Of Community Psychology, 38(3), 369-385.
Perry, S., Preston, C., Wallace, N. (2012, January 4). 5 Challenges for the Nonprofit World in 2012. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from: http://philanthropy.com/article/5-Challenges-for-the-Nonprofit/130193/
Office of Government Relations. (2010). Response to Key Issues Raised on January 28, 2010. Memorandum from Boys & Girls Clubs of America. Retrieved August 6, 2013 from: http://philanthropy.com/items/biz/pdf/prg031210d.pdf
(2013). Google Company Overview. Google.com. Retrieved August 5, 2013 from: http://www.google.com/about/company/
Basu, B. (2007). The Google Story. South Asian Journal Of Management, 14(3), 150-152.
MacFarlane, G. (2012, November 22). How Does Google Make Its Money? Investopedia. Retrieved August 18, 2013 from: http://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2012/what-does-google-actually-make-money-from-goog1121.aspx
The Guardian. (2011, June 10). Google staff highest paid workers in technology sector. Theguardian. Retrieved August 13, 2013 from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jun/10/technology-google
Pinter-Krainer, M. (2012, March 9). Internet Giant Google Faces Identity Crisis. HUFFPOST TECH, United Kingdom. Retrieved August 17, 2013 from: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/marc-pinterkrainer/internet-giant-google-fac_b_1853690.html
Gongol, T. (2013). THE PRELIMINARY RULING DECISION IN THE CASE OF GOOGLE VS LOUIS VUITTON CONCERNING THE ADWORD SERVICE AND ITS IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY LAW. 15(33), 246-260.
The cost of Google 's collaboration with China: The dilemma of political censorship in online business. (2007). Strategic Direction, 23(10), 15-17.
Weiss, T. (2013, June 20). Google Faces French Order to Fix Privacy Issues Within 90 Days. eWeek. Retrieved August 10, 2013 from: http://www.eweek.com/security/google-faces-french-order-to-fix-privacy-issues-within-90-days
Guynn, J. (2010, March 21). Google faces censorship issues every day, around the world. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved August 18, 2013 from: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-04-21/news/sc-biz-0422-google--20100421_1_google-and-yahoo-google-talk-censorship