Business Ethics and Tobacco: Stakeholders, Perspectives, and Government Role

Running head: BUSINESS ETHICS 1
Business Ethics
Student’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Date

BUSINESS ETHICS 2
Question 1: Describe the “performance-expectations gap” evident in this case – what were
the stakeholders’ concerns and how did their expectations differ from the company’s
performance? (15 marks)
A public issue can be defined as any matter that carries great concern between a company
and one or several stakeholders. The matter facing Coca-Cola entailed quality and availability of
sources of fresh water (Weber & Lawrence, 2014). According to the anticipations and aspirations
of the public, they believed that Coca-Cola one of the biggest beverage company in the world
would provide consumers with commodities free from contaminants and its production activities
should not affect the impact on the local communities negatively in areas where they were
situated. (Bosko, 2013) However, Coca-Cola failed to meet such anticipations set by the
stakeholders when a lobby group from India particularly from regions where the bottling plants
were located in India brought it to the attention of the public that Coca-Cola was depleting local
groundwater sources (Coca Cola, 2016). Ground water consumption by Coca-Cola affected their
needs with regards to the availability of drinking water and also tampered with water for
irrigation purposes. It also surfaced to the public that the production activities from Coca-Cola
were contaminated with pesticide remains that were considered dangerous. Global leaders
particular from the United Nations emphasized on the alarming acute water shortages in some
regions.
Question 2: If you applied the strategic radar screens model to this case, which of the eight
environments would be most significant? Support your position. (5 marks)
Using the strategic radar screen model by Karl Albrecht in this case study, it is evident
that only four of the eight environments would apply to this case study. The four identified, in
this case, will be the consumer environment, legal environment, social environment and lastly

BUSINESS ETHICS 3
the geophysical environment. However, regarding this case study, the most vital component
would be the geophysical environment since it is of great concern to the public due to the Coca-
Cola’s contaminating beverages and also due to the company’s depleting sources.
Question 3: In your opinion, did TCCC respond appropriately to this public issue? Why or
why not. (10 marks)
I believe that Coca-Cola addressed the issue amicably by changing the public concern
matter for their favor. Coca-Cola company prioritized its relationships with both the internal and
external stakeholders by responding to their concerns and solving the challenge using a
systematic approach. The firm also demonstrated its dedication to the community, the
environment and particularly the customers who are considered essential. According to the
evidence, it is clear that the company has made significant improvements through setting goals
for 2010.
Part B
Tobacco
It is in the 1990s that the issue of tobacco smoking and exposure regarding second-hand
smoke (SHS) got ranked as being the top three risk elements that contributed to the global
burden of disease coupled with childhood underweight and also led to air pollution particularly
the household (Arora & Nazar, 2013). Recently, following more than two decades, the issue of
tobacco smoking and exposure to SHS is still rated as being among the leading three elements
despite other risk elements getting replaced by alcohol consumption and high blood pressure
which are risk elements that lead to spreading of non-communicable diseases. The control and
regulation of tobacco have been recognized as a cost-effective solution along with limiting
consumption of dietary salt and treating individuals susceptible to cardiovascular disease, and

BUSINESS ETHICS 4
this can help in attaining the international target of 25% reduction in non-communicable disease
associated mortality by 2025.
The tobacco industry has been significant in both the spread and distribution of tobacco
disaster internationally via aggressive marketing campaigns. The tobacco industry has been
ranked as the only industry that sends to grave more than 5 million loyal clients annually. It is in
2005 that saw the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention regarding tobacco
Control which was the first treaty signed under the WHO auspices came into action. About
article 13 of the convention is recommended for a comprehensive advertising ban that would be
in force five years after the entry for each party (Arora & Nazar, 2013). As of today, only 19
member nations are covered by the full ban with regards to tobacco advertising, sponsorship and
promotion and this account for only 6% of the entire world population (Arora & Nazar, 2013).
However, more than one hundred countries instituted partial bans, and more than 70 countries
have no bans at all. Thus, this has become a matter of great importance to the general public
regarding their health concerns. It is through the use of a comprehensive TAPS ban that would
be strategic in reducing initiation and continuance with regards to the use of tobacco; thus, such a
policy measure would ensure that a significant population-level effect is felt curbing demand for
tobacco. Therefore, this is regarded as the best control with regards to smoking (Arora & Nazar,
2013). In 2015, the theme adopted for the global no tobacco day was to have a ban on tobacco
advertising, promotion, and sponsorship. The primary objective of such a theme was to
encourage the parties involved to affect a comprehensive TAPS ban and strengthen endeavors to
limit the tobacco industry interfering with the introduction and enforcement of such
comprehensive bans.