Microsoft and gay civil rights

The issue that happened in Microsoft makes me think about how to apply the stakeholder theory and how to reconsider Milton Friedman’s argument about business.

In this case, Microsoft tried to consider the effects of its employee policy at different levels, from different people’s angles. This is a good application of stakeholder theory. However, when satisfying every stakeholder is not possible, (like in this case), Microsoft has to draw a bottom line about priority of stakeholder and not to harm anyone. Microsoft’s stand about gay’s right is a great support and respect for employee diversity, in my understanding. It prioritized what should be considered first (the diversity respect)), and I don’t think their policy would harm anyone.

In Milton Friedman’s view, the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, which seems to catch the situation here. Some people would argue, why Microsoft bothers to announce the policy about gay rights? Is it their business at all? At first glance, it does seem quite “obvious” that there is no need of Microsoft to get involved in this hot-debated social issue. However, I think the point that Microsoft makes and the attitude it holds from the policy suggests its moral standards, makes it distinguished from other companies. I think it sets a good example for others about respect people as means but not as ends.