Analysis of the American Cancer Society and General Motor Company Ltd - Essay Example

Analysis of the American Cancer Society and General Motor Company Ltd American Cancer Society Organizational background Founded in 1913 by a group of 13 doctors and business personalities in New York, The American Cancer Society (ACS) has developed from a small business venture to the much-celebrated organization it is today. The main role of ACS is cancer management where it focuses on cancer prevention and reduction of cancer incidences. The Society has established a Health Service program with the mandate of conducting research on cancer to be able to come up with new cancer treatments; this role extends to education of the public on all issues concerning cancer (American Cancer Society, 1998). The American Cancer Society is mainly funded by donors, including the World Bank and various support groups. The World Bank is the society’s largest funder. The society also receives funds from the services that they offer to the cancer patients (Epstein, 2011). Other sources of funding for ACS include investment income, grants, and contributions from well-wishers. The operations of the organization are mainly run through volunteers drawn from all over the United States of America (American Cancer Society, 2011). The ACS is exempt from the taxpayer status, Form 990 of the year 2009 that the Society is a 501 (c) (3) organization which exempt from any tax obligations to the state. This status was granted in 2009 (American Cancer Society, 2011). Ethical issue The ACS, like all other organizations faces various challenges. One of the greatest challenges affecting ACS is self-interest. Investigations conducted on the ACS reveal that the Society has previously shown more interest in profits than on cancer prevention. In 2005 the ACS estimated that at least 1.37 million new cases of cancer were diagnosed. However, it is alleged that instead of intensifying research on new methods for preventing and combating cancer, the Society focused more on profiting from cancer grants (Isaacs, 2010). For example, an Occupy Wall Street report alleges that the ACS has put a greater financial emphasis on radiation and chemotherapy research than on life-saving prevention methods. ACS faces allegations citing that has focused largely on conventional medication techniques for treating cancer instead of preventive techniques. The accusations also include discrediting physician research on cancer preventive techniques. As such the society is unethical for trying to make money out of the large numbers of cancer patients through chemotherapy and radiotherapy, which are considered unhealthy (Epstein, 2011). Causes One of the greatest causes of this situation stems from the ACS’s culture of working with various stakeholders and particularly giving greater consideration to the views of the organization’s financial supporters (Epstein, 2011). The Society’s financial ties with the drug industry have skewed its policies regarding the environmental causes of cancer and the best approaches to managing it. This interest makes the fight against cancer difficult and has been linked to the increase in cancer deaths and incidences as sufficient preventive strategies have not been put in place because many drug companies discourage it (Isaacs, 2010). While the drug industry wants to make money selling therapeutic drugs and equipment, the ACS wishes to continue benefitting from the considerable financial support it gets from the organizations as well as profits from patient treatments. The other likely cause for the American Cancer Society’s preference for therapeutic methods is that cancer research is quite costly, especially research for preventive techniques. The organization seems to endorse both chemotherapy and radiotherapy techniques because they are a cheaper alternative in terms of research costs. A lot of research findings justifying the methods have already been provided both by the ACS and many drug companies. Although they are approved mechanisms of fighting cancer, these methods are always are largely unhealthy, and end up killing the cancer patient even before killing the cancer cells (Epstein, 2011). However, the fact that they are presented as the best techniques for cancer treatment appears to be sufficient justification for the society to spend less on research for preventive techniques and thus save costs and make a profit. Alternatives Several solutions can be applied to the ethical problem raised in this article. First, from the perspective of a member or worker at the ACS it would be important to reexamine the organizations' funding policy and corporate relations. It is important to reduce the level of association between the organization, which stands for the greater good of the public, and private pharmaceutical companies, which have profits as their major target. Even if it means funding for ASC will reduce, the latter will not have great influence in the society’s decisions. The next alternative would be to increase the amount of funding for projects dedicated to preventive cancer research. This can be achieved by coming up with laboratories specifically dedicated to preventive techniques for cancer. Similarly, another alternative would be to have centers all over the country dedicated to preventive cancer education targeting the whole community. These information resource centers would be useful to the general public by providing information about cancer and its prevention. The service should also be extended to online platforms that disseminate the same information. By doing this, the ACS will be serving its obligation to the public of informing them about preventive cancer care thus providing relevant publicity for people to take early precautions. This is likely to reduce cancer incidences. The third alternative would be to bring on board all the scientists carrying out research on cancer on a platform that allows all of them to share views freely. This would encourage all the dissenting researchers to move together with the society towards strengthening research in preventive treatment while bringing out the truth about curative treatments and their disadvantages. The importance of working together as scientists with one aim towards cancer management and provision of better affordable care to patients is that it will reduce the antagonism against the society’s activities by increasing transparency. The American Cancer Society could also consider a complete overhaul of the organization’s management and its working philosophy to align the latter with public expectations. The ACS has a public obligation to the American people and the world at large to do the right thing for the greater good, and its organizational philosophy and ethics are supposed to reflect this. This is especially so because it is a not-for-profit public funded organization enjoying a tax waiver. The organization would need a new management to completely change its public image and come up with programs that respond to the needs of the public and is free from the influences of the drug industry. The overhaul should include a change in organizational policies and regulations about aspects such as funding, relations with drug manufacturers and donors, and most importantly relations with other cancer researchers and the public at large. Finally, the organization could as well opt to preserve its current position so as to continue benefitting from funding from pharmaceuticals as well as proceeds from cancer treatment. This position would mean that the organization continues to concentrate more on cancer treatment using different types of therapy, which are allegedly more harmful that helpful. The position would continue damaging the society’s reputation and present it as one that is bent on profit-making although it presents itself as a not-for-profit organization. The organization can then counter these public accusations through campaigns in the media and lobbying to defend its current position and course of action. The controversy associated with such an alternative would hurt the organization and may lead to future public inquiries and other possible consequences, including losing the tax waiver. Solution The best solution for this ethical dilemma would be to concentrate more on projects dedicated to preventive cancer research. This can be achieved by coming up with laboratories specifically dedicated to preventive techniques for cancer. This could also include having centers all over the country dedicated to preventive cancer education targeting the whole community through both physical and online provision of information. These information resource centers would be useful to the general public by providing information about cancer and its prevention. This particular alternative is the best as it gives the organization an opportunity to make amends with the public by directly engaging the latter in cancer preventive strategies that have been lacking until now. This alternative is supported by the ethical theory of utilitarianism, which emphasizes that an organization should do food for the benefit of the greater public or a greater number of people (West, 2008). Utilitarianism is based on the premise that ethical choices are supposed to be based on consequences, just like other decisions. Utility is generally described as the best alternative in a case and utilitarianism emphasizes that the best alternative is that which benefits the greatest number of parties in the short and long term. By ensuring that research on preventive cancer management is improved and that the public is getting the right information about how to prevent cancer incidences or at least try to reduce them. The ACS is serving the good of the greater public and can thus be described as being utilitarian. The results of this alternative will not only help a great number of people in the U.S and elsewhere, but it will also increase the approval of the organization in the public and reduce criticism against it. General Motors Organizational background General Motors (GM) is one of the leading automobile companies in the World. Founded on 16, September 1908 in Flint, Michigan, as a holding corporation for Buick, the company has since expanded beyond the United States and has subsidiaries in different countries around the world. The company’s headquarter is located in Detroit, Michigan. GM focuses on the design, manufacture, market, and distribution of automobiles. The company currently has a presence in 37 countries where it manufactures vehicles under eleven brands, including Buick, GMC, Baojun, Cadillac, Isuzu, Jie Fang, Holden, Opel, Vauxhall, Chevrolet and Wuling. GM’s mission is to become the leading and the most valuable automaker in the world (General Motors, 2012). GM is also among the major employers in the United States. According to 2007 reports, the company had 212,000 employees and operates in 157 counties where it also employees many people indirectly. It is worth noting that GM almost went on receivership in 2008 when it was hard hit by a cash-flow problem. According to Webster (2008), GM almost west bankrupt following the cash-flow problem. According to Cole, the then GM manager, the cash-flow problem was occasioned by the dramatic rise in energy prices the past summer. The rise in energy prices caused a rapid mix shift in vehicles, which impacted on the company’s profitability. The automobile market favored fuel friendly cars due to the increased fuel prices. The company decided to concentrate in the production of fuel-efficient automobiles. The new automobiles would reduce the production cost, and the same time increases their demand in the market. This problem gave the company few options to exploit. The best thing was just to fight for their survival in the market by producing fuel friendly automobiles. Ethical issue To overcome the crisis, GM focused on improving the quality of its vehicles, which increased its competitiveness. For example, GM focused on manufacturing fuel-efficient cars that received huge demand in the market. The company also sought a bailout that helped turnaround its fortune. Since then, the company has been making huge profits (Webster, 2008). The main ethical issue in this case is that General Motors is making profit out of bailouts from taxpayers' dollars and whether the bailout of a private company using tax money was ethical. On the part of the government, this bailout generated negative hazard because most private companies large enough to affect the economy of the country substantially can take on greater risks expect bailouts from the government as they are perceived too large to fail. On the other hand, lose tax dollars that could be spent elsewhere in the development of the country for the public good, particularly on public infrastructure and welfare. For General Motors, the ethical dilemma comes in the form of government control of a private company. Decisions and strategies of the company cannot be free of government the government interference as it controls a stake in the company because of the debt owed. Causes The ethical dilemma brought about by GM’s bailout originates from two major causes leading to the bailout. The first cause is that General Motors suffered a financial crisis in 2008 in which the company almost went into bankruptcy. The sudden rise of energy prices led to a problem in the company’s cash flow system. The rise in fuel prices increased the amount spent affecting cash distribution in production expenditure. As a result, the imbalance in the company’s expenditure affected the firm’s profits (Gall, 2011). The second cause is that the cash-flow problem was compounded by the 2007/2008 global financial crisis. This crisis involved a slowdown of the U.S economy which diminished the ability of most people to borrow money or afford new vehicles. Because of the reduction in overall spending power by most people, General Motors could not sell many vehicles in the domestic market and its losses thus escalated. The company also encountered similar problems in the global market with the global economy slowing down and vehicle purchases reducing. The high cost of production in the American automobile industry also affected the company with chapter vehicles beating GM’s vehicles both in the domestic international market. Alternatives Several alternatives can be pursued in dealing with the ethical dilemma brought about by the GM’s bailout. In this case, the alternatives can either be taken by the company as a private entity or by the government; the most important thing would, however, be to explore the alternatives together. The first alternative that GM has taken is to overcome the crisis, is to focus on improving the quality of its vehicles, thus increasing its competitiveness. For example, GM focused on manufacturing fuel-efficient cars that received huge demand in the market, since then, the company has been making huge profits (Webster, 2008). The second option is that since the government has already played its part of keeping the company afloat through a bailout, it should now develop a plan to end the intervention in GM and recover all taxpayers' dollars with interest to invest the funds in different public utility budgets. Since the bailout, the company has been performing well even though competition from other carmakers and issues to do with currency exchange with the Japanese have weakened the competitiveness of the company. Even though the federal government made the decision to intervene in the company for the public good, the bailout is still seen as unethical and the only way it can be corrected is by the government ending its association with the company and recovering all money as quickly as possible. The third alternative of action would be for the government to ensure that watertight regulations and economic mechanisms are in place to ensure fair exchange rates and fair competition between automobile companies, this would help GM to be competitive against Japanese companies like Toyota and therefore, be able to move forward without government support, which is deemed as unfair. The week Japanese yen poses a challenge to the manufacture of General Motors automobile. Since it is weaker than the American dollar, the Japanese products become cheaper to the American people. Thus, the demand for the Japanese product would increase decreasing the demand for the General Motors Company. From the new sales, Toyota has outshone the sale Chevrolet by a margin giving Chevrolet a run for their money. To beat this, the government should try to stop currency manipulation that led to a weaker Japanese Yen and advocate for a fair competition (Holstein, 2010). The third alternative would be for GM to correct some of the mistakes that were made during the bailout whereby many franchise were closed down without notice and compensation thus making businesses to collapse. Hundreds of retail franchises all over the US owned by GM collapsed during the crisis thus encountering losses without compensation, workers also lost their jobs and there was the public outcry against what happened. The picture painted of the situation was that the government only cared for the large multinationals leaving the smaller companies to collapse as collateral damage. GM should in turn use its current income to help bring up most of the franchises that collapsed and restructure them into viable outfits. This would win back some public support for the bailout since jobs will be created, and business rejuvenated. Finally, the company may continue with its current operations and strategy, which mainly involve developing fuel-efficient cars and improving its competitiveness and profitability. This would mean that the government will continue having a controlling stake in the company for some time until the bailout money is recovered. However, without any kind of action to balance business and ensure that society is paid back by GM, the unethical bias of the bailout will continue being perceived the way it is and the ethical dilemma will therefore hang over the company for years to come. Solution As it is now, GM has recovered considerably and is turning up profits. The company is therefore, on the right track to full recovery and competitiveness and can be said to be doing well financially. The best way to deal with the unethical perception associated with the bailout is for the company to also bail out the smaller franchises that collapsed with the financial crisis it encountered. This would get people back to work and bring businesses back to work for the benefit of the general public. This can be approached from the perspective of the virtue ethics. Virtue ethic is a body of theories and perspective dealing with virtues. According to Aristotle, who is considered the father of virtue ethics, excellence or virtue and moral wisdom are the most important concepts that should govern a human being (Rachels & Rachels, 2010). Excellence is perceived as being achieved by doing what is practically right or moral to other people and expecting the same from them. In the case of GM, the government intervened with the bailout to save the company for the greater good, and the company should at least try to pay back the public by doing what is moral and supporting businesses that were affected by its failure back to their feet and benefiting many people though that. References American Cancer Society (1998). Cancer Facts & Figures— 1998, Atlanta pp, 1– 32. American Cancer Society (2011). National Home Office Form 990 Tax Year 2009. Pp.1-91. Epstein, S. S. (2011). National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society: Criminal Indifference to Cancer Prevention and Conflicts of Interest. Chicago: Xlibris Corporation. Gall, R. T. (2011). General Motors: Life Inside the Factory: One Blue-Collar Worker's Journey. New York: AuthorHouse. General Motors (2012). GM 2012 Annual Report. Detroit, MI. Pp. 1-177. Holstein, W. (2010). Why GM Matters: Inside the Race to Transform an American Icon. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing USA. Isaacs, T. (November 26, 2010). “The American Cancer Society runs with the money and away from the cure, Part IX.” Natural News. Retrieved from http://www.naturalnews.com/030521_American_Cancer_Society_cure.html. Rachels, S. and Rachels, J. (2010). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Webster, L. (18 November, 2008). “GM in Crisis—5 Reasons Why America's Largest Car Company Teeters on the Edge.” Popular Mechanics. Retrieved from http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/industry/4292379. West, H. R. (2004). An introduction to Mill’s Utilitarian ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Read More