Depends on the incentives, doesn't it? Most companies are for-profit, they don't have any incentive to do good beyond what PR requires. If you set a company up as a cooperative, you'd likely see different results. It's pretty common for housing in Germany, I'm a member of one and am living in one of their apartments. I pay below market rate, they take great care of the project, are super responsive to issues and they usually pay 4% dividend to all members.

I don't know of many cooperatives that do "normal" business, but I don't see a reason why e.g. a cellular provider couldn't run on the same model, being perfectly aligned with their customers' interests, because the customers are also the owners. Mondragon Corporation in Spain comes to mind, but I have no idea whether they're friendly to smaller competitors.

No, it can't. Google and Facebook are not really famous for copying the products of smaller companies. They tend to buy those companies instead.

Amazon is also not really famous for "bullying" its supply chain. We have heard such stories about Walmart and to some extent Apple, though you can argue that hard bargaining is not bullying and shouldn't be described that way. But Amazon has famously thin margins in retail. If they were really exploiting their suppliers so badly we'd expect to see fatter margins.

As for companies doing good, they do good every time they sell someone a useful product or service. More abstract conceptions of good are all problematic and often very biased.

Why would a company do "good"? A company's job is to make money, with some using whatever it takes while others being more gentle, but it's what a company is for. If you are looking for good, you'll have to check for non-profits.