About Ford and its stakeholders Ford is one of the truly multinational companies associated with the United States of America. It has existed at least as long as any of us have been alive. Because of the time they have been around and the scale of their operations, many people are influenced by the decisions they make and the actions they take. Over the years, like any large company, Ford has addressed its corporate social responsibility issues towards its stakeholders. However, lately the company has become very active in this regard, and the markets are responding positively to the changes made by Ford. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Before carrying out any analysis, it is important to clarify the four types of stakeholders. There are supporting stakeholders, also called type one stakeholders, who have a high potential for cooperation with an organization, but a low potential for threat to the organization. There are marginal stakeholders, also called type two stakeholders, who have a low potential for cooperation with an organization, as well as a low potential for threat to the organization. There are non-supportive stakeholders, who have a low potential for cooperation but a high potential for threat. Finally, there are stakeholders with mixed blessings, who have high potential for both cooperation and threat. Stakeholders are also organized according to four key attributes: legitimacy, power, urgency and proximity. Legitimacy refers to whether the stakeholder is perceived by outsiders as having a legitimate and appropriate right to a stake. Power is a stakeholder's ability to influence the course of a firm's operations, often linked to its legitimacy. Urgency has to do with how quickly the company in which the stakeholder holds a stake feels the need to act on that stakeholder's wishes. Finally, proximity has to do with exactly how far apart they are in a geographical and spatial sense. In every company, some of the most important stakeholders are the employees. The current CEO, Alan Mulally, wrote in a policy letter a basic code to follow in relations with all employees. Written earlier this year, the letter is clear in stating that employees must be treated with respect and paid fairly and competitively (Mulally 2). This means that as far as jobs go, Ford is probably a great place to work. However, while employees may be treated with respect while on the job, many would argue that the continued layoffs that are the result of Ford's clumsy growth in the marketplace over the past few decades are a form of worker mistreatment. During both of the last recessions, Ford laid off thousands of workers (Webb) (Wall St. 24/7). In fact, according to AOL Jobs, Ford holds the sixth largest layoffs of all time, with approximately 35,000 jobs in January 2002 (24/7 on Wall St.). While the job may have been great while it lasted, for those people Ford wasn't exactly a reliable employer who provided stable work. A valid argument could be made that by being irresponsible about their growth and contraction, these people basically ended up with good jobs ahead of them, which is an interesting take on worker mistreatment. Ford employees are type four stakeholders because they are very important to the company, but can also pose a threatwith high potential, particularly for unionized workers. They have very high legitimacy because they work within the organization, and their urgency is relatively such that they are largely, if not entirely, responsible for the production of Ford's products, vehicles, and more. Additionally, while employees in any organization already have some power, being unionized gives them even more power. This means that Ford employees are probably the most important stakeholders. The owners of Ford, i.e. the shareholders, are commonly regarded as very important stakeholders. They have high legitimacy and in some cases can have a lot of power – they can band together to vote against the current management of the company, for example – but they have very little urgency in the absence of a large stake in the company. Someone who owns 400 shares of Ford Motor Company will not receive much attention from either the company or the media regarding his opinions on Ford's operations. The most that the ordinary shareholder can do is buy and sell, influencing, even if minimally, the market price of the shares. Shareholders in general, however, can make decisions that aggregate to form the stock price decided by the market, which is something that can be good or bad for the company for various reasons. Ergo, shareholders are most likely type one stakeholders, so Ford should do everything it can to involve them in its operations. This may include voting on various issues or holding events for shareholders to make them feel more a part of the company in which they have invested. As is the case with any company, some of Ford's most important stakeholders are its customers. Producing cars is resource-intensive and requires a lot of research and development from a company, making them a large investment for the company that produces them. Additionally, a vehicle is often one of the most expensive items owned by any family, so the decision on which vehicle to purchase is often the result of a lot of time and effort. If Ford continues to ignore the demands of its consumers, their dollars will tell a lot and they will move towards competitors like General Motors, Honda, etc. While cooperation with customers is important, a single customer poses very little actual threat to an organization other than the threat of spending its money elsewhere. As such, they are supportive type one stakeholders. The best strategy would be to involve the customer in the production of new products, for example by organizing events at Ford dealerships where owners can provide feedback on new vehicles. Through this strategy, Ford would not only gain valuable insights from its customers, but also gain a more loyal customer base that feels actively involved in the company's affairs. It's interesting to see how the dynamic of different stakeholders changes as you move between them. For example, although customers are often the least legitimate and proximate stakeholders mentioned in this statement, they are arguably the most urgent. Ford, in most cases, will respond to customers' needs before anyone else's because their source of revenue, in the end, is what matters most. It is questionable whether they have power, because they have power within groups but, in general, a single customer of a company like Ford cannot have an extraordinary effect on the company. Alternatively, although shareholders are the most legitimate stakeholders – they actually own the company – they often have the least urgency. In any large company like Ford, it is difficult to imagine that a shareholder's interests are particularly important,.