Ompany and ustomers - Essay Example

Case Study Analysis Case Study Analysis The company has to inform them about the advantages and disadvantages of their products to the customers. But, the companies are of the view that customers are supposed and anticipated to practice due diligence before consuming a product. The companies argue that they are not responsible for telling consumers about the disadvantages of their products because it will eventually ruin their income and business. The customers in the case study had to search the internet in order to find the expected disadvantages of obese food.

Food researchers are working to find, pinpoint and solve health problems caused due to usage of fast food for a number of years now (Hill, Wyatt, Reed, & Peters 2003). The court established a comment that said that the company was not at all the only source of information on the side-effects of fast food and therefore, the claim of the plaintiffs is invalid. The legal authority also added that the food chain never requested nor forced anyone into eating their stuff. The company held on to the point that they are not liable for providing information about the quality of the food.

But, if one views the case from a societal angle then, the company had a duty to inform the customers about the side effects of the products. Still, the businesses do not consider ethics as the core and composite part of the business and say that their concern is profitability and because of this reason, ethics are rated at a much lower rank. However, various stakeholders of the company view the case study in a very divergent and different way. Nevertheless, customers considered themselves betrayed by the company.

Secondly, the employees are taunted by the general public that they work in an ethically degraded company. Thirdly, government and legal bodies should be concerned about current health-related costs associated with fast food businesses that are scattered across the country. Fourthly, managers must take care of the fat content of the products so that their harmful effects can be minimized. Fifthly, the suppliers are suggested to keep a close check on the fat of the chicken and other organic materials used in the company’s products.

Yet, it is important to note that all of the linked businesses with the company are looking to maximize their profit and therefore, they are least bothered with the societal costs of the actions they take in order to gain more and more money. Sixthly, the business support groups are famous for supporting the notion of profitability and they use it to protect and defend organizational unethical strategic choices. Finally, media and competitors are looking to defame the sued company so that they can reap some cheap publicity and marketing, to say the least.

The short-term solution to the problem can come from telling people to avoid chunk food in order to remain healthy whereas, the long-term solution can be developed with the help of governmental legislation. The government is recommended to establish quality control and check the fat content of material produced for the production of meat products. The customers are also needed to know that naturally produced meat and veggies are best for health and they should also be used persistently as an integral part of the diet plan.

Still, it is important to note that in the legal arena, the ethical standards of the corporate choices are not evaluated, and therefore, Judge said that nobody is forced to eat at the company. However, the company advertises its products and their quality across several channels and this kind of advertisement can be taken as a form of coercion. But, unfortunately, the legal system does not feel and see this point like this. Conclusively, the company should be obligated to inform the customers that their products can cause obesity, and therefore, the consumers are recommended to exercise caution and care while consuming organic products.

But, the case was decided in favor of the company because there is no force involved in luring the customers to eat at the company’s facility. Yet, the force of channel marketing is involved and people are attracted to eating unhealthy in the name of being cool and quick. The fast food chains are cheap and quick and due to these reasons, busy and poor people have to avail their services. In the long term perspective, consumers have to pay health-related costs due to the consumption of fast food.

The customers are recommended to eat healthy and natural food despite of its high prices. In this way, the customer will remain safe from the long-term adverse effects of chunk food.