Question 3:
What was the moral minimum required of the company in this case? Would it favour some stakeholders more than others? How would you defend balancing the interests of some stakeholders more than others?
Response:
The moral minimum is to recall the bottles from the Midwest region alone, where the deaths occurred.
Had they made this decision, Tylenol's executives would have benefited by not having to lose so much money in recalling more nationwide. The shareholders would have been hurt regardless because if the company was not socially responsible, the public would not respect their business and the market share would drop anyway for not taking acceptable precautions and crisis management.
The general public is the most important stakeholder to any business that depends on consumers. It is extremely important that the public is pleased and satisfied before any other stakeholders because without consumers, there is no product demand and therefore no business.
Question 4:
Imagine that a third-world country volunteers to take the recalled product. Its representatives make assurances that all tablets will be visually inspected and random samples taken before distribution. Would that be appropriate in these circumstances? Would it have been a better solution than destroying all remaining Tylenol capsules?
Response:
It would not be appropriate for Tylenol to allow a third world country to take the recalled product. Their Credo states, “We believe our first responsibility is to the doctors, nurses and patients, to mothers and fathers, and all others who use our products and services”. If the product is not suitable to be consumed by North Americans, it would be unethical to consider it good enough for those in a third-world country. Tylenol would also be taking a huge risk by sending the tablets to a third-world country as they could cause more damage to their reputation if some of those tablets happened to also contain the cyanide and result in more deaths. Destroying the remaining Tylenol capsules was the most responsible and ethical choice under these circumstances.
What was the moral minimum required of the company in this case? Would it favour some stakeholders more than others? How would you defend balancing the interests of some stakeholders more than others?
Response:
The moral minimum is to recall the bottles from the Midwest region alone, where the deaths occurred.
Had they made this decision, Tylenol's executives would have benefited by not having to lose so much money in recalling more nationwide. The shareholders would have been hurt regardless because if the company was not socially responsible, the public would not respect their business and the market share would drop anyway for not taking acceptable precautions and crisis management.
The general public is the most important stakeholder to any business that depends on consumers. It is extremely important that the public is pleased and satisfied before any other stakeholders because without consumers, there is no product demand and therefore no business.
Question 4:
Imagine that a third-world country volunteers to take the recalled product. Its representatives make assurances that all tablets will be visually inspected and random samples taken before distribution. Would that be appropriate in these circumstances? Would it have been a better solution than destroying all remaining Tylenol capsules?
Response:
It would not be appropriate for Tylenol to allow a third world country to take the recalled product. Their Credo states, “We believe our first responsibility is to the doctors, nurses and patients, to mothers and fathers, and all others who use our products and services”. If the product is not suitable to be consumed by North Americans, it would be unethical to consider it good enough for those in a third-world country. Tylenol would also be taking a huge risk by sending the tablets to a third-world country as they could cause more damage to their reputation if some of those tablets happened to also contain the cyanide and result in more deaths. Destroying the remaining Tylenol capsules was the most responsible and ethical choice under these circumstances.