Coco-Cola India's Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibilities - Case Study Example

Discussion of Coco-Cola Indias business ethics and corporate social responsibilities and State of the institution Date of submission Discussion of Coco-Cola Indias business ethics and corporate social responsibilities Coca Cola India should have the moral obligation to take further steps that would involve further testing of their products, promotions on their products quality or even recalling their products with the intention of improving their public relations (Coca-Cola India 1). This follows a press release by the Center for Science and Environment (CSE) in India stating that most of the Coca Cola India products were contaminated with a deadly cocktail of pesticide residues. The research was carried out by Pollution Monitoring Laboratory (PML), which researched on twelve major drinks manufactured by Coca Cola and PepsiCo companies. They indentified the pesticide residues to be dangerous since they had a great negative effect on the immune systems of individuals. However, Coca Cola Company maintained that they had tested the products in their sample labs carefully and found that they were healthy for consumption (Coca-Cola India 12). Coca Cola India should address this issue urgently through promotion and re testing of their products quality to ensure that they maintain the number of customers. Additionally, it should make a press release of its lab results to assure the consumers that the products are of high quality and free from any pesticide residue as the Center for Science and Environment had earlier stated. Coca Cola India should also apply the seven moral standards to improve its relations with the public. These include core ethical values, relativism, utilitarianism, moral rights, Kantianism, justice and ethical egoism (Schwartz 1). It is moral for Coca Cola Company to take additional steps such as further promotion of products quality, recalling their products and testing of their products; regardless of the costs, assuming that there is no legal obligation to do so. 1. Core Ethical Values By using the core ethical values such as being responsible, trustworthy, caring, and embracing citizenship, Coca Cola India will improve its relations with its customers and the government (Schwartz 1). After the negative research results released by Pollution Monitoring Laboratory, many customers lost trust in Coca Cola Company. Coca Cola India should, therefore, focus on regaining its trust from the public through being honest, loyal, ensuring transparency, being intelligent and keeping to its promises. Retesting and releasing the results of their products will enhance transparency. Coca Cola India conducted an independent laboratory study that proved that its brand products were healthy for consumption and was not contaminated with pesticides. The company should disclose this information to the public through the press. However, it must be honest with its customers. Coca Cola India should not allow the buzz pass away. It must portray loyalty to its customers by addressing the issue. It must also promise that all its products will be retested to confirm if the allegations are true or false. Recalling of the products would also be necessary to portray its integrity. Coca Cola India should recall it’s purchased products to show its responsibility and care towards its key stakeholders who are the customers. The company must be accountable for its actions and admit incase the allegations are true. If they are true, Coca Cola India must acknowledge its mistakes and sincerely apologize to the people affected (Schwartz 2). In a previous case in Belgium 1999, many children complained of intestinal problems and nausea. Further, another 250 consumers all over the world complained about the same leading to the ban of Coca Cola products for a whole week (Coca-Cola India 9). However, Coca Cola reacted to the matter and assured the customers that they would enhance their safety by producing high quality products. The move by Pepsi to file an allegation questioning CSE credibility is not commendable. Coca Cola India should learn to accept its mistakes, but assure the public that a similar case would not happen again. Coca Cola India should also strategize on ways it could protect the community and its environment by obeying the laws and regulations in the production process in order to portray citizenship and show its care towards the community. 2. Relativism After Pollution Monitoring Laboratory of CSE released the results that most Coca Cola products in the market were contaminated, most of the customers believed that it was true. Relativism moral standards, however, state that the majority in all cases determines what is right and what is wrong (Schwartz 3). Consequently, Coca Cola should use relativism to make proper judgment on whether the allegations are true or false. In this case, majority of the people believed that the findings were true and hence supported the decision by the government to ban the sale of Coca Cola products. Additionally, Coca Cola Company should come up with strategies that would assist in regaining its customers. For example, it is important to apologize to the consumers and promise that the company would ensure their protection, henceforth and in the future. Recalling the products sold during that duration for retesting and clarification of their quality would be helpful since Coca Cola would show that it cared for its customers. Through this, majority of the consumers would regain their trust in the company. 3. Egoism Coca Cola Company should avoid any case that portrays egoism to the public. Egoism is an unacceptable moral standard that satisfy the self-interest of the company alone without considering the interest of others (Schwart 3). However, Coca Cola should ensure that it serves the best interest of the public; perceiving on the long term benefits of their company. In this case, Coca Cola should recall its products, retest them and if the results show that the products had residues of pesticides, it should apologize to the public. Perceiving self-interests without the considering the interest of its customers will be a negative gesture (Schwartz 4). Coca Cola Company should work on clarifying the allegations made against its products. It should consider recalling its products, retesting them and apologize to the affected individuals since this would improve its public image. 4. Utilitarianism As Jeremy Bentham said, Coca Cola should enhance the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Their products should be of high quality to meet the limits laid down by the European Economic Commission (Coca Cola India 11). Coca Cola should also be very careful while doing business abroad. In most cases, the issues that emerge abroad may be difficult to solve easily. To avoid these issues, it should improve on its laboratories to ensure that all its brands in the market are properly tested to avoid residues of pesticides in them. For example, European Economic Commission is very keen on testing the products imported from other countries. Through these tests, it identified Malathion, DDT among other pesticides and insecticides in Coca Cola products (Coca Cola India 11). Coca Cola Company should be obliged to serve the people to their best interest by improving their laboratory testing facilities to promote and ensure the manufacture of high quality products. This also ensures consumer protection in the end. Campaigns should be initiated to improve their public image and regain trust from their customers. 5. Kantianism It is the moral responsibility of Coca Cola Company to ensure that it fulfills the will of its customers. Kantianism uses reversibility, universalizability, and respect formulations while responding to the critics against their products (Schwartz 6). Through universalizability, Coca Cola Company finds it as a moral responsibility to be transparent in disclosing its research results. Additionally, reversibility enables Coca Cola Company consider what its consumers are passing through. In a previous case, most consumers experienced nausea and intestinal complications through consumption of coca cola Kinley water brand. In this case, however, researches indicate that there were traces of pesticide and insecticide residues in twelve Coca Cola brands. Eventually, these contaminations would lead to severe effects on the body of its customers. Respecting the customers and the laws laid down by the importing countries would be an important factor to consider while producing its products. Coca Cola Company should ensure customer protection in the end. This is done by using proper and high quality lab equipments in measuring the levels of pesticides and insecticides present in their products. In spite of the cost associated with this process, it is essential since it prevents future similar problems from affecting coca cola products consumers. 6. Justice All actions that Coca Cola undertakes must be just and fair. Concerning this case, compensatory justice is most applicable. This means that Coca Cola Company should ensure that it compensates for all contaminated products purchased by its customers (Schwartz 9). The process is possible through recalling back the contaminated products from the customers and hence providing them with compensation. Through this, Coca Cola Company will ensure customers’ protection and increase the customers’ trust in the company. The measures, also, increase its success in doing business abroad as it increases its public relations. Retesting of its products will also be necessary to confirm if the allegations are true or false. Finally, Coca Cola Company should make a press release of its findings since it is just and fair to inform the customers of the correct results. In case the allegations are true, Coca Cola should sincere apologize to all and promise them that a similar situation would not happen again in the future. 7. Moral rights Coca Cola Company products have been tested and the results states that all products sold in Delhi are contaminated with pesticide residues (Coca-Cola India 11). The moral rights standard advices that Coca Cola Company should strategize on how to eliminate the residues found in their brands. The process may cost the company a lot in the end. However, it is their duty to ensure that its customers are protected from these threats. The pesticides present in the products cause serious immune deficiencies to the health of the consumers. In this regard, Coca Cola Company while producing their products should take safety and health measures as strategies, to ensure they protect their consumers. Recalling and retesting its products would be an important gesture to show its responsibility and care towards its consumers. Coca Cola and PepsiCo’s’ fast move to file a petition against CSE is inappropriate (Coca Cola India 1). Proper procedures should be followed to identify the truth about their allegations before filling the case in court. Milton Friedman would disagree with the opinion that Coca Cola Company is morally obliged to take essential steps such as more testing of their products, promotion of their quality standards and the recalling of their products. Milton Friedman supports egoism as a moral standard. Contrary, egoism is a negative moral standard since it supports that every company should pursue their self-interests first and ignores the interest of others. It would be wrong and unjust for Coca Cola Company to ignore the interests of the public and pursue their best interest since this would lead to loss of their customers (Business Ethics Notes 4). In this case, Coca Cola Company should strategize on convincing the consumers that their products are of high quality. The company should recall and retest their products to clarify if the allegations by the Center for Science and Environment (CSE), against them are true. Consequently, Milton Friedman’s opinions are not true and henceforth, cannot be used in solving Coca Cola’s current situation. Pursuing self-interests and ignoring other peoples interest will be a negative gesture. In this case, it would be wrong for Coca Cola Company to target at making profits and fulfilling their personal and self-interests without putting the customers’ interests into consideration (Business Ethics Notes 4). Works Cited Business Ethics Notes. ADMS 3660. N.p. n.d. Print Coca-Cola India. N.p. n.d. Print. Schwartz, Mark. The ‘Nut and Bolt’ of Determining Ethical Responsibility. N.p. n.p. Print. Read More