1) Fill in the following matrix, replacing “brand X/Y” with the name of the brand and

supplying the overall (“bottom line”) rating of the brand by the relevant website
indicated in the row. [Do not attempt to cram a lot of detail into this table—the
point is to allow you and the reader to see an overall pattern.] [ /1]

Budweiser Carlsberg

SE Rating - D Rating - B

GS Ethical Index Score – Ethical Index Score

50 – 58

GY

2) Summarize the pattern you observe in the matrix. I.e., do the websites give
both brand a similar score, do they agree that one gets a much higher score than
the other, or do the websites disagree on the relative score they assign the 2
brands? (If the two brands have roughly the same score as one another according
to both websites, replace one of the brands that gets a different score from at least
one of the websites.)
[ /1]

By reviewing the matrix, the Brand Budweiser has a similar rating on both sites, D
rating on the SE site indicates that the brand receives some praise but mostly
criticism and an ethical index score of 50 for Budweiser indicates that the brand has
an extremely low rating and fall into the bottom rankings of all the beers on the GS
site. Carlsberg has a similar rating to Budweiser on the GS site separated by only 8
points, but it falls in the middle of the group of listed beers. On SE, Carlsberg has a
much higher rating than Budweiser, the rating of a B indicates that they receive
some praise but no criticism. Carlsberg is rated much higher on the SE site than
Budweiser, their score compared to the GS site is also much higher.

3) (a) If the sites disagree about the ratings of one or both of the brands, why?
I.e., why do the methods or criteria of the different sites give rise to different
ratings in the case of these two brands?

The sites disagree about the rating of Carlsberg, the SE guide rates Carlsberg much
higher than the GS guide. The factors that are included in the SE guide are based
on company records and do not comment on the product itself. The site states they
use public information which is available and calculates ratings based on tree
ratings and public info which is transparent. The GS guide bases their scores on 4
main categories including environment, animal, people, and others. All deciding
indicators of their overall ethical score are based on public information as well.

(b) If the sites agree that one brand is more ethical than the other, why? I.e., why,
according to the methods and criteria of both sites, is one brand better than the
other?

Both guides agree that Budweiser is an unethical brand, their methods are similar
but still have some discrepancies. The basis of the SE guide's rating is based more
on overall company ratings while the GS guide has individual factors which indicate
the brand lacks ethics.

[To answer questions 3(a) and 3(b), you need only information from the rating
websites themselves, but you may need to hunt around the sites to find it. The
links to criteria/methodology links above for the sites might help.] [ /3]

4) Choose one issue or concern relevant to question 3 to research in more detail

with respect to the two brands. Start by digging into the source of the relevant
information used by the rating site (you might have to hunt around for this), and
see if you can find out more by following up that source. You should also see what
information is available from other sources on the issue, especially as it relates to
the brands in question. Clearly summarize your findings in a way that helps the
reader to understand why the different sites rated the different brands as they did.
Fully reference your research using APA style. [ /3]

One concern I found was how the SE guide breaks down praise and criticisms, some
of the critiques include fines that were handed to the company. This indicator is a
changing variable based on ownership and leadership within the company. In this
case, Budweiser was fined due to practices that promoted sales in developing
countries illegally, and the company was also fined in 2019 for hindering cheaper
imports for one of its brands. These are unethical acts that should affect the scores
and rightfully so. On the other hand, the company is given praise for their green
initiatives and the fact that they are the world's #1 aluminum can recycler (Shop
Ethical. 2022) but then are criticized for plastic pollution, so my concern is with how
this affects the rating. What factors are considered heavily, and which factors
outweigh the others. Do fines outweigh green initiatives and what impact does this
have on the companies score?
5) Based on your analysis of the websites and what you have learned answering
questions 1-4, which of the sites provides the most valid rating for the brands you
are looking at, and why?

Based on my research of each site and further understanding the deicing factors of
each site, I feel that the GS guide is most valid. The four categories that are
analyzed also have subcategories. These include factors such as political donations,
Fairtrade, animal welfare, and genetic modification. The SE guide breaks into
critiques and praises, I find this less effective when attempting to make a decision
on which brand to purchase based on ethics. For example, on the SE guide, the
criticism outweighs the praise by a landslide, however, the ratings do not indicate
that you should boycott the product. If the critiques heavily outweigh the good the
company does then it would make the most sense to boycott this company. The GS
guide breaks the categories down further and gives individual ratings to each factor
balancing the ratings out. There may be factors that have no relation to the product
and therefore cannot affect the rating. In this situation, the SE guide is more
effective because it does not include factors that may be unrelated to the product.

[In answering this question well, it is necessary to address more than the level of
factual detail provided by the site. You also need to consider the criteria used, the
appropriateness of the criteria to the nature of the product, and to the method of
aggregation and weighting. To help you think about the practical and conceptual
challenges of coming up with a single number that reflects the social responsibility
of a firm (or in the case of our assignment, a product or brand), see the Unit 14
assigned reading:
W. Norman and C. MacDonald. 2004. "Getting to the Bottom of 'Triple Bottom
Line,'" Business Ethics Quarterly 14(2) (April): 243-62.] [ /3]

6) Weighing the answers to the previous questions, which of the brands do you
conclude is the most ethical/socially responsible, and why? [ /2]

Carlsberg is the most ethical of the two brands, Budweiser is less ethical due to
their actions including multiple fines, poor ownership, and involvement in conflict
minerals. Based on score alone Carlsberg ranks higher on both sites and according
to the SE site has no critiques only praise for actions taken in the environment.
According to the GS guide Carlsberg has top ratings on categories including Animal
Welfare, Political Donations, Genetic Modifications, and nuclear power. I believe
that the negatives outweigh the positives in this scenario.

7) Which of the two brands is the more commercially successful? On what grounds
do you say so? [You need to do a bit of research to answer this question.] [ /1]
Around the world, Budweiser is the top brand as they are owned by Anheuser-
Busch, a company from Belgium while Carlsberg places slightly behind. Budweiser
has a brand value of $28.9B whereas Carlsberg has a brand value of $24.2B
(Forbes, 2022), Budweiser beats out Carlsberg in revenue by $4B making it the top
brand in the world.

8) Based on your answers to questions 6 and 7, does the comparison of these

brands tend to constitute evidence for or against the instrumental business case for
CSR? [ /1]

Instrumental CSR indicates that responsible business pays off, however in the cases
of Budweiser and Carlsberg, we know that the higher grossing company is less
ethical. Based on the findings of this research, the less ethical a company the
higher the value of its brand. We can conclude from this same research that the
evidence is against a business case for CSR.
Shaheed Najak

214901771

February 10th, 2022

SOSC 3040