Stakeholders of this controversy
include the owners and suppliers of BVO, but most importantly, the customers of
Pepsi. The customers of Pepsi are directly affected by this case because they
will be the ones experiencing the health risks if they are consuming a chemical
that is associated with such risks. Additionally, the power of the customers is
shown when Pepsi removed BVO from many of their products after a petition
against the chemical gained over 100,000 signatures. The owners are
stakeholders because if they cant produce a product that can allow their
customers to trust them, their profits will be directly affected negatively.
Lastly, now that BVO is known to be a chemical associated with health risks,
those who supply the chemical to soft-drink companies will no longer be in
business because if the companies care about their consumers, they will find another
way to improve the shelf life of products without harming consumers.
Individualism is the practice of
being self-reliant or putting your own goals first in order to gain success in
life. In business, the practice of individualism is to focus solely on
maximizing company profits for the stakeholders. Friedman, a Nobel Prize
economist feels that as long as a company fits within legal boundaries their
only goal should be to maximize company profits. Under this theory, PepsiCo is
behaving ethically because the amount of BVO being used falls under the legal
limits allowed in products set by the FDA. Additionally, the use of BVO allows
them to increase profits by improving shelf life.
Another theory affecting the ethics of a
company is the theory of utilitarianism. What this is, is working to find
happiness in yourself and others for the purpose of meeting intrinsic values.
The goal of utilitarianism is to convey happiness and pleasure to anyone who
can feel it. Under this theory, PepsiCo is not behaving ethically. While they
are trying to keep costs down, which makes people happy, they are not caring
for their consumers, which makes people unhappy. When consumers realize the
negative health risks associated with a chemical like this, it is not going to
make consumers happy. This fails to follow the theory of utilitarianism, which
makes PepsiCo’s use of the chemical unethical.
PepsiCo’s practices can be
evaluated using the theory of Kantianism to see if it is ethical. What
Kantianism is, is acting rationally and being motivated by good will by
respecting people. What this means is when making decisions, you should
consider others and make sure that your decision will not impact others
negatively. When evaluated with PepsiCo’s practices, this also makes PepsiCo’s
practices unethical. Pepsi is using a chemical that is banned in many countries
due to health risks, by keeping it in their products in countries where it is
not allowed Pepsi is not acting rationally. Pepsi is not respecting people or
being motivated by good will if they are still trying to use a product that is
shown to be unhealthy to help increase profits. Additionally, it is not
rational to use a chemical when many people know it is unhealthy because it
builds mistrust among consumers toward the company.
Personally, what I think represents
company’s ethical practices the most is how well it can conform to the virtue
theory. The virtue theory is the practice of using characteristics that help to
allow things to function without problems. The virtue theory is what helps
things get done the way we intend them to and also operate the same way. Additionally,
virtues should be followed to ensure this. These virtues are, courage, honesty,
self-control, and justice. PepsiCo is not using these virtues in their decision
to use BVO in soft drinks. PepsiCo could have been a front-runner in consumer
awareness and used more responsible ingredients, which would increase profits
through consumer trust. By using the chemical Pepsi is not being exemplifying
courage, honesty, self-control, or justice because they are aware of the
problem but aren’t fixing it because it helps them profit.
A lot could have been done to prevent
this situation from happening or even reacting to it after the controversy
happened. PepsiCo should look at their company on an international level and
look into ingredients that might be banned in some countries. If ingredients
are banned such as BVO in countries due to health risks, PepsiCo should be
responsible and eliminate those ingredients and replace them with safer
options. Additionally, if PepsiCo makes a statement that they will remove the
chemical from all products, they must keep their word. Pepsi over a yar ago
said they would remove the chemical that to this day is yet to be removed. This
is unacceptable and if they want to build a trust among their consumers they
must earn it and provide products without ingredients that should be removed
due to health reasons.
Reference
Coupland,
John. "Why Would You Put Brominated Vegetable Oil in Soda?" Popular Science. Popular Science, n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
Dr.
Mercola. "Coca-Cola and PepsiCo Agreed to Remove Brominated Vegetable
Oil." Mercola.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
O'Brien,
Robyn. "Mountain Dew Ingredient Banned in 100 Countries." Robyn
O'Brien. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Oct. 2015.
PepsiCo.
"Official Site for PepsiCo Beverage Information | Product." Official
Site for PepsiCo Beverage Information | Product. PepsiCo, 15
Oct. 2015. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
"Who
We Are." Brands Explore. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Oct. 2015.
Salazar,
Healther. Power Point Lectures. 2015.