In Gumdrop Company, there were various ethical issues identified when it was operating in America. The unethical aspects caused various problems to not only the company, but also other persons using its products. These issues eventually led to the closure of the company in America through corrupt and improper channels; but it opened up new branches in Argentina and Columbia.
One of the ethical issues was production of landmines that were banned by the international community. This concern is founded on the fact that landmines were used in wars and the effects they have on the land and residents are too hazardous to be accepted. The landmines pose as severe threats to not only the planters, but also unsuspecting humans and animals. By producing landmines and selling them to the war torn regions in the Middle East, the company did not have respect for human life. Human life should never be taken for granted, but Gumdrop seemed unconcerned about the dangers and adverse effects of the landmines in these war torn regions.
The company should have instead concentrated on the legalized operations, rather than engaging in these illegal trade. The secretive businesses highlight the concentration of greed and disrespect for human life. Being one of the largest ammunitions manufacturers, it had huge income and should have been contented with the profits gained legally rather than deal in illegal trade. Dishonesty is also evident, since the company engaged itself in illegal trade despite being subjected to international laws and treaties. There was hence managerial irresponsibility, seeing that the company was aware of the existing laws and the implications of dealing in such businesses.
The other problem of this company was the manufacture of substandard armor for humans and military cars. The main reason for the manufacture of armors is to protect the soldier from getting hurt, or to reduce the effects of attacks and hence save lives. Contrary to the armors’ requirements, the ones developed by Gumdrop were substandard and they barely protected the wearers. This was irresponsibility and greed; in addition, it was an aspect of disrespect for human life. The company failed in its mandate of ensuring that the soldiers were safe during an attack and practiced indecency by manufacturing substandard products and keeping quite to protect their contract.
The management should have come clean about the conditions of the armors and either ask the soldiers to return the armors already in use for exchange or give out new armors that would assure the soldiers of security and safety. The company should have taken responsibility and admit its error to the military and try to re-negotiate the contract terms rather than jeopardizing the lives of the soldiers, who entrusted their lives on the jackets. The company hence broke the trust that was entrusted on it by the soldiers and the citizens by making the soldiers vulnerable.
Admitting to failures and taking...