Law & Ethics in the Business Environment


 As the senior vice president of marketing for Marigold, I would not approve the plan to market Marigold formula in place of breastfeeding to mothers in Liberia and other African nations. According to World Vision International, only severely malnourished mothers would have harmful effects from breastfeeding. Even moderately malnourished mothers can breastfeed their children without detriment to either the child or the mother (Common Myths about Breastfeeding in Emergencies, 2018). Therefore, even in war torn countries experiencing a drought, breastfeeding is still the cheapest most efficient way to feed children compared to formula. Rights theorists believe in protecting fundamental rights, and believe in the moral worth of each individual (Langvardt et al., 2019). Therefore, in the breastfeeding versus formula scenario, they would opt to leave the decision to individual choice and protect the mothers right to choose the best feeding method for their family. A utilitarian however, believes in maximizing utility for society as a whole (Langvardt et al., 2019). Since breastfeeding is the lower cost option that maximizes health benefits for children and families, a utilitarian would most likely opt to abstain from marketing the product. Lastly, a profit maximizer would choose the option that provides the most long-run benefits for their company, within the limits of the law (Langvardt et al., 2019). Therefore, a profit maximizer would choose to market and sell the formula, to achiever the highest profits for Marigold. 


As the senior vice president of the marketing department, I would absolutely not approve this plan. Even if I value the product that the company produces, that value quickly diminishes once it is forced upon people that would not benefit from the product. "The first step in analyzing moral issues is obvious but not always easy: Get the facts. Some moral issues create controversies simply because we do not bother to check the facts" (Velasquez et al, 2015). As the senior vice president, I would have to gather data in order to know that I was making the right moves for the people being served and for our company.

The rights theorists group would agree with my way of thinking. This group believes in protecting the rights of individuals. This would mean that there would not be any forced decision in whether to hardcore promote the product or promote breastfeeding. The facts would be laid out and the choice would be at the hands of the mothers. A utilitarian would look at the benefit of the larger population. "Utilitarianism requires a decision maker to maximize utility for society as a whole" (Langvardt et al., 2019). This group would view that breastfeeding is the option that most benefits the majority and would opt for breastfeeding over formula. On the other hand, a profit maximizer would look to the benefit of the company. "Premised on the concept that corporate leaders are agents who owe contractual obligations to investors, shareholder theory argues that ethical dilemmas should be resolved with a focus on maximizing the firm’s long-term profits within the limits of the law" (Langvardt et al., 2019). This simply means that a profit maximizer would look to benefit the long term value of the company. They would opt to heavily market the formula solely focusing on the well-being on the company. 

    • a month ago
    • 6

    Purchase the answer to view it

    • attachment