Question

Assume that you are a high-level manager for a shoe manufacturer. You know that your firm could increase its profit margin by producing shoes in Indonesia, where you could hire women for $100 a month to assemble them. You also know that human rights advocates recently accused a competing shoe manufacturer of engaging in exploitative labor practices because the manufacturer sold shoes made by Indonesian women for similarly low wages. You personally do not believe that paying $100 a month to Indonesian women is unethical because you know that in their country, $100 a month is a better-than-average wage rate.
Write 1-2 paragraphs explaining whether you would have the shoes manufactured in Indonesia and make higher profits for the company or avoid the risk of negative publicity and its potential adverse consequences for the firm's reputation. Are there other alternatives? Consider the impact of the route you choose and short-term vs. long-term profits, as well as the ethical decision making criteria.

Answer 1

Answer:

The issue here is that you need to balance your company's profits and possible negative due to bad press.

On one side (the good and righteous side), if you do not produce shoes in Asia, your long term survival economic is doubtful, but people view your company as a company that does the right thing no matter what. Will it increase sales? Theoretically it should, but in practice it doesn't. Are Nike sales hurt because each shoe is produced in an Asian country that pays $0.25 per day? No, they aren't. The same applies to Reebok, Adidas, Puma, New Balance and every single major shoe manufacturer in the world. Bad press hurt tuna back in the 80's, but some companies are not affected by it.

The alternative (the evil, dark side of the force side) results in your company being able to survive on the long term. It will not necessarily mean that your company will grow and become the world's largest shoe manufacturer, but you will be able to survive and continue to operate.

There is also a trick that you can use to avoid reputational damage and bad press, and that is to establish a foreign subsidiary in Indonesia using a different name. Then your foreign subsidiary sells you the manufactured goods, and the blame fall son the subsidiary. Believe it or not, that simple solution is used by most corporations including clothing manufacturers, electronics, toys, etc.

If you analyze this from an ethical point of view, the alternative is much simpler. Producing in Indonesia (or India, or Burma, or Pakistan, or Vietnam, etc.) and paying a $100 salary will allow a family to live a very decent life and probably even prosper. They will have a much better lifestyle than the rest of their neighborhood. Each Indonesian worker represents one less poor family in Indonesia. On the other hand, American families will probably get hurt, but it is also much easier for an American worker to get another job that pays a normal wage (in US standards) and allows them to live well.