Table of content.

|Topic |Page number |
|Case analysis |2 |
|Case synopsis and themes |3 |
|Question 1 |3 |
|Question 2 |6 |
|Question 3 |8 |
|Islamic Perspective |12 |
|References |16 |

CASE ANALYSIS: MOSANTO BALANCES WORLDWIDE STAKEHOLDER CONCERN.

Monsanto company is a multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation which is based in U.S as a headquarter. It is the leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate around the world. The corporation was founded in 1901 by John Francis Queeny, and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri. It operates in agricultural biotechnology products such as Herbicides, pesticides; crop seeds. The company previously involved chemicals and later switched its business to biotechnological foods.

The revenue of the company in 2008 was $11.365 billion where net income from this revenue was $2.024 billion and these earnings ware generated by 21,700 employees. Monsanto came under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department in 2009, because of involving un-ethical issues and its aggressive litigation and political lobbying practices.

The CEO of Monsanto, Hugh Grant has come up with an idea that is to create partnership with non-profit organization across the world to improve the life of farmers in the developing countries. It focused the regions where unused land and cheap labor force are available such as India and some parties of Africa to be enable to generate more revenue, satisfy and increase shareholders wealth in every year.

CASE OVERVIEW/ SYNOPSIS

This case relates to Monsanto’s innovation on a biotech products. It also highlights how its stakeholder perceives the agricultural crops and how it protects at the same time societal safety environment. It further concentrates that whether Monsanto practices social responsibility in the society that it operates and be free from un-ethical dilemmas.

Moreover, the case discussed the issue of such business sustainability which Monsanto deals with in the long without harming humans, living things and the environment. Beside, how Monsanto overcome these challenges and threats that faces currently and future as well is also demonstrated in the case.

Themes: consumer awareness, stakeholder relationship, legal environment, product labeling, government regulations, code of conduct.

QUESTION ONE:

If you were Monsanto’s CEO, how would you best balance the conflicting needs of the variety stakeholder groups that Monsanto must successfully engage?

First, we identify the stakeholders that involve in the case of Monsanto and there are 4 major stakeholders, namely: consumers, shareholders, environmentalist and employees.

1. Consumers

This type of the stakeholder is really concerns about the benefit that carried by the product. In the case of Monsanto, biotechnology is used to manipulate the genes of organisms in order to modify the seeds that might be able to produce high quality crops. This biotechnology issue gives impact to consumer regarding the safety of the food from it.

Biotechnology uses chemicals in the process that might bring side effect to consumers. People believe that these chemicals might affect their health. To cope with this issue, Monsanto need to increase the consumer awareness of the product and the effect of it for consumers’ life. To create the consumer awareness, Monsanto needs to use some techniques to success on it. These techniques can be realized by using media to deliver the right information to them. The negative words that have been spread regarding the Monsanto product has reduce the interest of the consumers towards the product. To regain their attention, Media can be the solution to clarify it. Besides media, the company could also balance the conflicting needs by organizing events that might be able to promote the product. These events should be organized effectively in order to gain the consumers awareness about the products and also be able to reduce or eliminate the negative image from the product.

2. Shareholders

Shareholders are also important party for the company where they invest their money to Monsanto. The shareholder put their trust to the company in organizing the money they already invested. To gain their consideration and attention, the company needs to provide a clean and clear image by obey the rules and regulations in conducting the business. By obey it; the company can assure the investors that their investment is safe. In fact, it might gain the other investors interest towards the company. Besides, to balance the need of the shareholders that put their trust to the company, Monsanto needs to appreciate them by paying the dividend as a form of appreciation of their trust so far to the company.

3. Environmentalist

* Engages in community debate/events discussing the negative impacts of biotech food on the human and animals’ life. This will help company to act accordingly to any issues or take necessary precaution to prevent it from occurring. * Invest great deal of time and money on research and data collecting of the introduced products before launched to the market. * A greater involvement of plant preservation in order to cope with the
Increased awareness of the environmental departments.

* Isolate the areas where sprayed with genetically modified crops from the one that is not, to limit the effects to the minimum and try to save few plants from being changed or modified .

4. Employees

* Provide financial and non-financial incentive for employees to increase their commitment toward company goals and objectives. * Publishes manual explaining its ethics program to both employees and clarification of how misconduct effects the consumers trust which at end effect company image and reputation on marketplace. * Published standardize code of conduct on the workplace and stated punishment for the misconduct or illegal action by employees.

QUESTION TWO

Companies like Monsanto that can offer technology to improve human lives are often said to moral obligation to society. How can Monsanto best fulfill this moral while also protecting society and the environment from the potential negative consequences of its products?

It is difficult to uphold moral obligation and be in the biotechnological crop industry. Monsanto involved moral ethics either direct or indirect in its business including: Bribing for high level officials, Bribing Food and Drug Administration & Environmental Protection Agency, Deregulation from government. Herbicides and pesticides kill or harm the living things such as birds, insects and neighboring farmer’s crop and later the GMC may have long term effect on humans.
It deliberately bribes the high level officials to cover its mistakes and an immoral issue that violates the societal safety and human live. Many articles have been written regarding the repercussion of producing biotechnology crops on humans and environment.

According to article published by World Health Organization in June, 2005 mentioned that this issues of genetically modified food or crops should further investigated” The premise of the Principles dictates a premarket assessment, performed on a case-by-case basis and including an evaluation of both direct effects (from the inserted gene) and unintended effects (that may arise as a consequence of insertion of the new gene).

The Codex safety assessment principles for GM foods require investigation of:

(a) Direct health effects (toxicity);
(b) Tendency to provoke allergic reactions (allergen city);
(c) Specific components thought to have nutritional or toxic properties;
(d) Stability of the inserted gene;
(e) Nutritional effects associated with the specific genetic modification
(f) Any unintended effects which could result from the gene insertion.
HOW MONSANTO CAN FULFILL MORAL OBLIGATION AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS.

Monsanto should hire scientists who can test and predict the side of herbicide in the long run and do further research and development to really disclose the hidden environmental effects and negative consequences on mankind. Although; many tests were done so far the result is not yet proved with accord by reliable sources.

In reference to Asia Food Information Centre Journal produced in October, 2001, stated that “Researchers must prepare comprehensive data to support the safety and wholesomeness of new crop varieties developed through biotechnology. This process requires years of laboratory and field testing before a product can be brought to the market.

To provide assurance that foods derived through biotechnology are as safe as those produced by traditional breeding programs, the safety assessment strategies involve several key steps. These steps include molecular characterization of the genetic modification, agronomic characterization, nutritional assessment, toxicological assessment and safety assessment”.

On the other hand, there are other opinion which says that genetically modified foods or crops are safe as the traditional foods and no contamination of the environment which may result from using the technology but this notion seems to bias compared to its counterpart. Few ways of how Monsanto can best fulfill the moral obligation and reduce environmental wastage are listed below.

✓ Avoid any kind of bribe and miss-behavior

✓ Constitute or establish professional conducts which will be used as a guidelines for company code of ethics

✓ Switch the business to healthy sector which will not bring harmful any more to the society

✓ Must be able to satisfy it’s stakeholders

✓ Provide degree of social responsibility

QUESTION THREE

What can Monsanto do to alleviate stakeholder concern and how could these actions be woven into the marketing strategy for the company’s products?

We are going to discuss this question in three points:-

1. Moral and safety implications of genetically modified food.

a) Monsanto should create effective standards for determining safety of biotechnological crops to humans and animals. They can do this by for example controlling the amount of the chemical in the seeds or reducing the concentration of toxicity in the chemical. As we know that the most important thing that the consumers worry is their safety. Assuring that to them will give them a sense of believes in the product and they will buy the product without any doubts.

b) There should also be proper regulations to ensure that the negative effect is minimized if not eliminated at all. This can be done by creating an organization whereby its main concern is ensuring that the amount of food made by genetically modified food is reasonable and safe at the same time.

c) Proper supervision and monitoring of employees should be adopted by Monsanto because we do believe that the problem may not be occurring because of the management or the biotechnology per say but may be the employees themselves are not trained enough and they are not monitored properly in terms of injecting the correct amount of the chemical into the seeds. This will give the consumers’ confidence for the product and at the same time, critics will be much less therefore increasing the sales of genetically modified food hence the profit.

d) We also think that, severe punishments should be imposed to organizations like FDA, EPA and AFACT which accept bribes from companies and they pressure the government on legalizing the illegal without putting into consideration the safety of the consumers. The punishment should be intense so that to make these organizations fear to go against the will will of people. This will lead to a safe society who live in peace and harmony. The consumers will feel that they are being taken care of and hence the fear of buying products will not be there.

2. Safety concern about Bovine Growth Hormone.

a) Instead of using the so called recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBST) which contains a synthetic hormone, Posilac, which harms the health of the cows and human beings, Monsanto should look for other ways which will not harm cows and human beings who drink cow’s milk. This can be done by instead of using Posilac, they can increase the amount of food for the cow hence increasing the amount of milk, and they can increase the level of quality of the food itself or even looking for a better breed which produces much more milk.

b) We are saying prevention is better than cure. Even if FDA has proved that there is no difference between rBST and rBST-free milk, other studies has confirmed that there is still a danger of the synthetic hormone. The FDA most probably has been bribed and for safety reasons the consumers should not purchase the product.

c) We think that there should be a clear labeling of the product that it is made from genetically modified seeds to give the consumers a choice to purchase the product. This will give the consumers’ confidence and eliminate their fears on the product.

3. Concerns about Environmental Effects of Monsanto’s Products.

a) Monsanto should look for other chemicals which can somehow neutralize or make the Roundup less toxic to preserve and care about animals and the environment. As we all believe that having a conducive and safe environment is the most fundamental thing that a human being looks for.

A conducive environment leads to a harmonious life much less of worries in purchasing products.

b) Monsanto should also look for a system to make sure that the toxics are not transferred to other places like water sources which will harm the aquatic animals.

c) Isolation of farms which plant genetically modified seeds to avoid environmental impacts and hence by doing this safeguards the health of human beings.

d) We also think that, even if FDA has been proved that the chemical is soluble and does not have much effect on aquatic species, but still the fear is still there among the consumers and also aquatic animals would die and therefore a system must be in place to secure that.

e) Lastly, Monsanto should educate people especially farmers on how to inject the chemical and how to overcome the issue of ‘super bugs’. We suggest that the farmers should practice crop rotation and alternate the types of chemicals so that the bugs not to be resistant to the chemicals.

ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE.

1. Bribery:

[pic]

Translation: - And do not consume one another's wealth unjustly or send it [in bribery] to the rulers in order that [they might aid] you [to] consume a portion of the wealth of the people in sin, while you know [it is unlawful].

This ayah from surah Al-Baqarah verse 188 clearly states that it is forbidden to indulge in taking bribery which was immoral practice that Monsanto do. God has preserved Hell Fire for these kinds of people.

2. Lies:

[pic]

Translation:-

As was the steadfast manner of the house of Firaawn, (Pharaoh) and the ones before them (who) cried lies to Our signs, so Allah took them away for their guilty deeds; and Allah is strict in punishment.

This ayah form surah 'Āli `Imrān ayah 11 clearly states the danger of speaking lies and those who practice it they should be aware that God is very strict in punishment. Monsanto has given wrong information about the safety of their products to consumers and animals for their own benefits.

3. Maqasid Al-Shariah :-

[pic]

Translation:-

Those are the ones who have bought the life of this world [in exchange] for the Hereafter, so the punishment will not be lightened for them, nor will they be aided.

This ayah reminds us the importance of life and the reason for life in this world. God clearly states that we should not make the life in this world more important than the life in the hereafter because the life in the hereafter is the eternal one.

Monsanto has cared less on the life of the consumers and they are only thinking in succeeding on earth making more profits in this world forgetting that God is watching them at all times. Killing living things knowingly is a very huge sin towards God and an intense punishment will be given to those people.

4. Nature :-

[pic]

Translation:-

... Them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allah." And whoever takes Shaitan (Satan) as a Wali (protector or helper) instead of Allah, has surely suffered a huge loss…

We learn from this ayah that it is the work of Satan to influence us to change the nature of God. Certainly, Satan has influenced Monsanto employees to change the nature of God by injecting chemicals which are highly toxic and dangerous to living things without a sense of care to their customers.

References

1. O.C. Farrell and Michel Hartline, Marketing Management Strategy, 5th (2011) editon South-western, Cengage Learning,

2. Monsanto website: http://www.monsanto.com/Pages/default.aspx

3. Quran.com

-----------------------
1