BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 2
Introduction
Monsanto, the sustainable agriculture company has undergone many changes since its
beginning in 1901. According to the mission statement the company is currently “committed
to supporting research with academic and USDA scientists who have complementary areas of
expertise (Monsanto, 2014).” The company has evolved and diversified its product line from
chemical products, such as sweeteners and plastics to petroleum, packaging, and other
materials. A few years later, Monsanto developed an herbicide that would soon cause trouble
for the company. Monsanto has faced many legal problems due to its produced chemicals.
The majority of Monsanto’s existing revenue is drawn from biotechnology sales. The
genetically modified (GM) plant seeds generate most of these sales. These seeds were
developed with the ability to kill insects that could harm the plants, along with containing
herbicides that rid the crops of weeds Although Monsanto believes these plant seeds to be the
innovative answer to solve the problems faced by farmers, the company has endured a great
deal of criticism from the public regarding negative health effects caused by genetically
modified plants and food. Critics have also voiced a concern of potentially harmful
environmental effects in relation to Monsanto’s herbicide. Because of various legal, bribery,
and patent issues, the company’s ethics have been questioned (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell,
2013, p. 313). In order to determine the efficacy of Monsanto’s ethical culture, the cost and
benefits of growing GMO seed and the management of harm done to plants and animals
should be addressed further after analyzing the company.
BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 3
Efficacy of Monsanto’s Ethical Culture
Since 1901, Monsanto’s culture has evolved just as its product line. The sustainable
agriculture company is currently pleased with the company’s appealing culture based on
innovative technology and entrepreneurship. According to the company’s website, Monsanto
is “focused on empowering farmers—large and small—to produce more from their land while
conserving more of our world's natural resources such as water and energy (Monsanto, 2014).”
While Monsanto may have a satisfying company culture and vision, their ethical culture is in
question. Despite much controversy and criticism, Monsanto does attempt to account for the
interests of shareholders and uphold an ethical culture. When issues arise involving the
harmful effects of company products or substances used, Monsanto reassures the public that
everything the company participates in has been approved by the Environmental Protection
Agency to confirm that no harm has been done to the external environment. When issues of
illegal company bribery were discovered, Monsanto took full responsibility for the unethical
behavior and paid the penalty of the employee’s wrongful actions (Arndt, 2010). . The
company has also invested substantial amount of money to programs designed to further
advance the improvement of communities in developing countries. Because the resources
available for agriculture are decreasing, Monsanto is aware that proper resource utilization is
crucial. The company has addressed this fact by implementing a policy that is meant to
“produce more yields in crops, conserve resources, and improve the lives of farmers (Ferrell,
Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2013, p. 315).” One way the company feels that this can be done is by
delivering benefits by growing genetically modified plant seeds. As a whole, Monsanto
wishes to take steps in providing sustainable agriculture at a multinational level.
BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 4
Costs and Benefits of Growing GMO Seed
Monsanto’s strong emphasis on biotechnology resulted in the groundbreaking invention
of genetically modified plant seeds which have since revolutionized the agriculture industry. The
cost benefit analysis of genetically modified foods has been extensively studied a topic for
debate for decades. Soon after their development, the company was able to impress farmers and
potential customers with their technological equipment that successfully provided better yield for
their crops without enduring loss from insects, but many remained skeptical of these chemically
modified seeds. Skeptics claimed that consuming these GMO seeds could pose as a health risk
to humans (Landsman, 2013). Because GM seeds cost more than regular plant seeds, those in
opposition to the product reason that farmers will be in turn earning less. Others disapprove of
the company adding unnatural chemicals to the GM crops, such as glyphosate. Glyphosate is a
toxic ingredient of Monsanto’s Roundup and is previously known to cause illness with contact.
Despite the beliefs of skeptics, all GM foods are approved as safe to consume according to the
FDA (Melton, 2012). Many fear the possibility that the chemicals in GM plant seeds will result
in insect and weed resistance to pesticides and herbicides after continuous exposure. Despite
many critics that oppose the company growing GMO seeds, genetically modified crops have
produced more yield and ultimately saved farmers billions of dollars. By growing GMO seeds
farmers have the capability of producing more crops with less land usage. The development of
GMO seeds is essentially allowing the needs of humanity to be more easily met through
agriculture (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2013, p. 310). As well as providing benefits for
farmers, Monsanto warrants that possible harm to plants and animals is avoided by following the
regulations of ruling government agencies.
BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 5
Management of Harm to Plants and Animals
Monsanto is continually using technological advancements to develop the most beneficial
seeds. One of which is known as “Roundup Ready” containing herbicides. These GM seeds
have been speculated to cause harm and even death to some animals. Monsanto has questioned
the viability of these claims and responds that the Environmental Protection Agency rules these
chemicals as harmless. There are also claims that plant can perhaps be contaminated by
genetically modified crops. According to the textbook, “Some scientists fear that GM seeds that
are spread to native plants may cause those plants to adopt the GM trait, thus creating new
genetic variations of those plants that could negatively influence the surrounding ecosystem
(Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2013, p. 312).” This has become worrisome because plants are a
useful resource needed for human survival, and harming the external ecosystem could be
hazardous. The sustainable agriculture company, once again, attempts to rest concerns in the fact
that the EPA has approved all that the company creates. Monsanto calmed fearfulness by
announcing , “Roundup Ready,” would not typically find its way into the end up in ground
water to cause contamination or harm to animals therein (Cummins, 2013). Management of
prospectively causing harm to plants and animals may be an area for Monsanto to improve for
the future.
Conclusion
Although going forward Monsanto has an opportunity to prosper, the company will
likely continue to face difficulties and opposition in the future similar to that of the company’s
past. While focusing on accomplishing the company’s mission statement, Monsanto has
BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 6
developed a strong culture involving the betterment of the agriculture environment. The efficacy
of Monsanto’s ethical culture has been put to the test after dealing with a number of
organizational ethical issues. The scientific studies of critics have also posed as a threat and
negative publicity, but Monsanto has addressed these issues as a way of comforting their
shareholders and consumers (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2013, p. 316). A system of managing
the avoidance of harm to plants and animals, along with verifying the safety of GM foods for
customers may be areas of further study.
BUSI 472 Case Study – Page 7
References
Arndt, M. (2010). Monsanto v. Food Inc. over How to Feed the World. Bloomberg
Businessweek. Retrieved from.
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/next/archives/2010/01/anyone_whos_see.html
Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and
cases (9th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western/Cengage Learning.
Landsman, J. (2013). Monsanto and GMO lies revealed. Natural News. Retrieved from.
http://www.naturalnews.com/041559_Monsanto_GMOs_lies.html
Cummins, R. (2013).Millions against Monsanto: On the Road to Victory. Natural News.
Retrieved from.
http://www.naturalnews.com/041257_Monsanto_GMO_labeling_free_trade_agreements.
html#ixzz2yxRcqfuo
Melton, M. (2012). Most Dishonest, Least Transparent Company Monsanto Claims ‘Integrity’
and ‘Transparency’ Top Priorities. Planet Inflowars. Retrieved from.
http://planet.infowars.com/health/mafia-monsantos-highest-priority-monsanto
Monsanto. (2014). Monsanto Company. Retrieved from.
http://www.monsanto.com/pages/default.aspx
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
