It has been a firestrom controversy that company should support either art o environemnt Myraids o people assert that supporting art will churn out more profits. However, putting effort at environment will instill people positive image of company and reduces more company's operation cost.
Firstly, eco-friendly company can apporach to people more amiable. Generally speaking, numerous people think environmentally friendly company positively as they love the way they are thinking. For example, one of the eco- friendly plaster company, P&A, advertised chemical free wall paper in public. Though it was expensive, as it was not only environmentally based but also concerned sensitive people's skin. Consequenelty, more and more people lined up to purchase the product and company eventually, earned1 million dollar a year.
Secondly. In environmentally friendly way, company costs less for their running. In general, running business in environmentally friendly way can less use up money as it uses less energy and non reusable resources. For example, according to statics centered on Korean's giant companies: Hyundai, Samsung,LG the miniscule amount. 30 percent uses reusable energy for their operation. However, though they spent more external cost to remove environmentally harmful material duiring the process they consumes less money. As they are using reusable energy: solar, tides, wind for their running they do not need to spend more money to buy more sources to run their company like fossil fuel based company
that is on coal, oill.
To sum up, seemingly investing on art is much more lurcrative to company's profits. However, in long term benefits, company should rather buttress environment protecton than art as it can give company good image and costs less for their running. |