Question

Scenario 1: Wholesome Hamburger Company Suppose you work for the Wholesome Hamburger Company, which owns 100 fast-food restaurants in the state of California. In response to a severe drought, the state government has required residents to use less water. During the drought, the government will continue to allocate and subsidize water for businesses. That is, the Wholesome Hamburger Company will not incur any additional fees or restrictions for using water to manufacture its products. The company uses the following amounts of water, respectively, to produce each product. The head of the company has asked you to propose a strategic plan for the company’s future. GALLONS OF WATER PRODUCT 1,800 1 pound of beef 12 1 head of lettuce 2 1 walnut 468 1 pound of chicken.

What is the ethical dilemma or issue? Identify at least 3 options or strategic plans that the company could consider. What do you recommend? In other words, which option(s) should the company pursue? What is your rationale for each recommendation? In other words, what are the strongest arguments that you can make for and against each recommendation?

Answer 1

Answer:

The case of Wholesome Hamburger Company is very situational because if it thinks of its business and profit this will be unfair to the people of California as they are suffering from drought and the water consumption in this time is not correct. The company can use water as water is provided to them for the production but ethically this won't be justice as every body needs water and to prioritize water for basic use is more important than using it for production. The company management needs to reduce water consumption and save water.

The three options or strategies that a company can use are- First it can take advantage of using Government subsidize water as it is cheap and there production will not be affected. The second can be the utilizing water sources. The third option is to lower down or stop beef burger production as it consumes more water because of the cleaning of beef.

According to me to recommend, the production of beef burger can be stopped for some time as every process is important related to water. As sometimes to think more for the society over business profit is good. The image which company will earn, will be more than the selling burger.

The rationale for my recommendation is if the company will buy water from the government this will increase it's product costing and the price of burger can be increased as this is situational and to make a balance this can be an alternative. This can affect buyers consumption but market requirement will not be affected. To reuse water and preserving its sources may work for long as scarcity is uncertain as against to it there can be quality issue. The third recommendation is to stop beef burger production as to save water as this process requires lot of water but as consequences the competition can increase, customer can switch to alternative, etc. But at the end when the problem will be resolved and reason will be out the outcome can be far better, social responsibility is our first priority.