1. If you were Monsanto’s CEO, how would you best balance the conflicting needs of the variety of stakeholder groups that Monsanto must successfully engage?
Monsanto has improved in terms of its corporate responsibility; however it does not maintain the most ethical culture possible. Monsanto is in a difficult position, as it produces products that many people do not understand or trust. The corporation also does much business in very poor countries where it is very easy for critics to accuse Monsanto of taking advantage of people who do not know any better. Monsanto’s low levels of charitable giving and history of ethical lapses do not help the company’s case that it is seeking to improve the lives of the people of the world. However, Monsanto
…show more content…
As Monsanto is a multinational company whose products are consumed by the food industry, it has to strictly emphasize on its moral obligations concerning the society where their products are being sold. Such moral obligation includes providing best quality of seeds to the consumers and betterment of farmer’s life (Stern, 2011). For this purpose Monsanto ensures high yielding properties of their seeds and it would prevent against insects eating their precious crops. This would ease the farmers in keeping their crops safe and reduce their hassle to sprinkle pesticides for crop safety. On the contrary these genetically modified seeds reported in causing health related issues on consuming the food grown from them. This impact can be reduced by the company by putting more efforts and investment in development and research to improve and eliminate the side effects of their products without much damaging the environment (Monsanto, 2018). Furthermore, Monsanto can employ a team to regularly check whether the negative effects are still being possessed by their products and if it so then the authorities can be alarmed about this and suitable actions can be taken against this
On the off chance that there's anything you read – or offer – let this be it. The substance of this article can possibly drastically move the world in an assortment of positive ways. Furthermore, as Monsanto would love for this article to not become famous online, whatever we can ask is that you share, offer, share the data being exhibited so it can reach however many individuals as could be expected under the circumstances.
In 2008 “Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear” was published in Vanity Fair. Penned by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, this exposition presents acts by Monsanto that may be considered questionable. Acts such as possessing a “shadowy army of private investigators” and the production of “two of the most toxic substances ever known”. The company was established in 1901 as Monsanto Chemical Works.
Monsanto is that it shouldn’t matter if someone uses a product that THEY bought with their own money for other uses. If someone has to agree to the terms of something then they should have the right to do whatever they please because as the Court stated in its ruling, the product will keep its value. Overall, My opinion is that nobody should be done wrong just because their doing something goes against a “Terms of Agreement” which doesn’t seem like a real crime. In the end, Vernon Hugh Bowman won the case all due to Bowman’s one-time purchase of Monsanto’s product which allowed him to take advantage of their patent products over seasons without having to respect the rights of a patent
Embracing global markets require organizations to look at the opportunities to maintain corporate responsibility while being diverse and culturally engaged at the same time. Some of the principles that are used in global scenarios will help companies to provide their foundational beliefs in a global business world. The Monsanto Company will be able to apply the Caux Round Table Principles for Business to illustrate the mission, goals, and strategies that will be used in the organization to achieve global corporate responsibility. The Caux Round Table (CRT) works to improve our global community through a network of business leaders that design strategies and practices centered around kyosei and human dignity (Goodpaster, Maines & Weirmerskirch,
The best arguments for my position are that Monsanto produces higher yielding crops. For example, “In 1970 the average corn harvest yielded approximately 70 bushels an acre. With the introduction of biotech crops, the average corn harvest increased to roughly 150 bushels an acre” (Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell 384). The reason I find this statistic important is because it doubles crops yield, which means more people get to eat. As we know our population is expanding at an enormous rate, which causes the demand of food to go up.
A class action lawsuit filed April 21, 2015 in Los Angeles County sues Monsanto of false advertising. The plaintiffs are Elvis Mizaie, Edison Mirzaie, and Romi Mirzaie. They are natural persons and residents of Los Angeles County. In this lawsuit plaintiffs are on behalf of themselves as individuals. The defendant is Monsanto Company (“Monsanto”), is a Delaware corporation,
Genetically modified crops also aim to lower the failure of crops, which can maximize the benefits of farmer through the increase of income from selling crops. Nevertheless, this technology created chances for biotech companies to exploit farmers, even causing farmers to commit suicide. Big companies developed the genetically modified seed, and sell it to farmers. But farmers have little bargaining power only, they can only rely on the biotech companies. These companies do not aim to help farmers to increase their income, but aim to maximize their own profit.
In the article entitled Monsanto's Harvest of Fear, Donald L. Barley and James B. Steele demonstrate that Monsanto already dominates the United States food chain with their genetically modified seeds. They are currently targeting milk production which is just as scary as the corporation's legal battles against the small farmers. This situation leads to a history of toxic infections or diseases. There were many disagreements between Gary Rinehart and a stranger about the innovative seeds. They were under surveillance and an investigator came in the picture.
For years, the health and safety of genetically modified foods have been debated and researched by scientists, but the question still stands: should genetically modified foods be allowed for consumption? The process of genetic modification involves inserting a gene from bacteria or a virus into an organism where it would normally not be found. The purpose is to alter the genetic code in plants and animals to make them more productive or resistant to pests or farming techniques. Genetically modified organisms, more commonly known as GMOs, have been a controversial topic of debate for a number of reasons. The ethics behind genetically modified foods come into question due to an abundance of short and long-term effects from the process, many of which are still unknown today.
What do a tomato, soybean and a french fry have in common? They are all some of the most commonly genetically modified foods sold on the market today. By using the genetic information from one organism, and inserting or modifying it into another organism, scientists can make food crops stay fresher, grow bigger, and have the crops create their own pesticides. Nevertheless, the technology to modify genes has surpassed its practicality. Genetically modified foods need to be removed from everyday agriculture because of the threat they pose to human health, the environment, and the impact on global economy.
Court records indicated that 226 plant workers became ill” (828). This quote from the doctors who observed the plant employees proves that Monsanto made chemicals not safe for human environments. By using this quote, the authors are able to uncover Monsanto’s past fabrication of harmful substances. It demonstrates how Monsanto was willing to create and sell chemicals that are known
Once a business grows large enough in size to become an entity responsible for thousands of employees, it can be argued that it must also begin to take on a larger responsibility towards society as a whole. The company not only holds an obligation towards the well-being of their growing number of employees, but as their reach and the impact of their actions grow, they must also develop in a way that does not negatively affect the civilization around them. As an employer of as many as 22,500 people in 2015, and with operations based in the Americas, Europe, Australia, Asia Pacific, and Africa, Monsanto can easily fit into the mold of a company with these types of social responsibilities (Monsanto Company, 2016). No stranger to ethical controversy, Monsanto has been accused of acting against the best interests of society in order to benefit financially on multiple occasions. Though these controversies vary greatly on a case by case basis, they all have the same point of origin: Monsanto’s use of biotechnology in order to genetically modify crops.
New regulations, an enforced code of ethics and striving to be more socially responsible has led Monsanto to enhance their relationships with stakeholders. Monsanto wrote a pledge to inform all of their
Introduction The key ethical issues that were presented in this case study were quality control, lack of customer care, responsiveness, and harming the customer. The Johnson and Johnson case may have been seen as a turning point due to many things the company did right. However, there were many ethical issues in this case which will be explored more throughout this paper.
The guidelines of honesty and morality that the United States is so quick to claim they follow, do not always seem to be exhibited in the products that they promote and produce. The fertilizer from “Dawn of the Dread,” was just one example of the real motives behind American production and influences. United States companies only care about making their money even if that means that their product can cause harm on people or the environment. Consumers want a product that they can trust at low price with high quality ingredients. While it can sometimes be hard to create an efficient product at the specific price point buyers want, the consumers should be informed of the danger that can happen from using this product.