Bio-Plastics Inc. Case Study

1008 Words 5 Pages
The primary focus of a business is to generate profits as quoted by Friedman “the role of a business is to make profits” (Friedman, 1970, pg. 1). Every business strives to be the best and achieve global sustainability which Bio-Plastics Inc. (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015) have achieved and are currently in the situation where changes in the business due to the market could result in consequences. In this essay, I will state the theories that influenced Marry-Anne’s, the CEO of Bio-Plastics Inc. (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015), decisions regarding the future of her company and will explain the potential impacts of this decision, while also stating the position and feelings of Rajesh, a non-executive board member, and what will result from either one of these …show more content…
(Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015) currently are as they have “received many accolades as a leading company in terms of global sustainability” (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015, pg. 1). Sustainability means the ability to use resources in such a way that the same resources can be used without the compromisation for the next generation of users. (McKee, Kemp and Spence, 2012). In the Bio-Plastics Inc. (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015) case the two most important pillars of sustainability is the economic and social sustainability. The reason for this is that from Marry-Anne’s position she is concerned about economic sustainability which is “A company’s ability to regularly produce outcomes consistent with long term economic development” (McKee et al, 2012 p.537) to continue with business operations. This being the case, by switching to an American based company Bio-Plastics will be able to reduce transport costs as well as having faster production and generate jobs on the American market as well as increase their revenue by using genetically modified trees which means that they can have a quicker turnaround but by doing so they will have to cut their partnership with Lanos, which will give them a bad …show more content…
(Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015) should continue to remain in partnership with Lanos. The reason for this is that he feels that even though switching to an American based firm will provide additional revenue, but in the long run it will not be as profitable for the company as it would have lost its “award winning good name” (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015, pg. 2) and their reputation as a socially sustainable company would be ruined. This is because the meaning of social sustainability is “The improvement of daily life for the greatest number of people through improving fair income distribution; promoting gender equality; ensuring equal access to land ownership, employment and education; investing in basic health and education; and enlisting the participation of beneficiaries” (McKee et al, 2012 p.537) and by disengaging in the partnership which the Lanosian people rely on, for the profits from the company to educate its citizens and get them into micro entrepreneurship, many jobs will be lost and the country’s economy would suffer. The company also adopts environmental sustainability, meaning the preservation of natural resources and enhancing the quality of life for the less fortunate (McKee et al, 2012) as they are currently using renewable “energy from wind farms” (Kilkolly-Proffit, 2015 pg. 1) and if they follow Marry-Anne’s position of leaving the country, this would ruin the image of

Related Documents