Week 1 DB1
Describe a public issue and how it has evolved through the public issue’s life cycle
Purdue Pharmaceuticals; The opioid epidemic
Many Americans are concern with the issues of drug usage in our country. For years, drug addiction was taboo that stated the only people affects by drug addiction is the wayward child. Nevertheless, people of the world have always had a love affair with drugs. As a matter of fact, the use of medication goes as far back as biblical times. In Isaiah 38:21, Isaiah said to Hezekiah’s servants, “Make an ointment from figs and spread it over the boil, and Hezekiah will recover.” In Ezekiel 47:12, “Their leaves will not wither, and their fruit will not fail. Each month they will bear fresh fruit because the water comes from the sanctuary. Their fruit will be used for food and their leaves for medicine”.
Drug use itself is not necessarily a bad thing; many people depend upon medication for healing and to counter the suffering of pain. However, when misused, drugs become the dreaded monster we fear. We see this played out in neighborhoods across American. Pharmaceuticals manufacturers are under enormous pressure to please shareholders. Purdue Pharma was one of the leading pharmaceuticals manufacturers that promoted OxyContin (oxycodone) between 1996 and 2001(Psaty& Merrill, 2017).
They hosted training conferences for practitioners, sponsor pain “education” programs, and used “physician profiling to target high-volume opioid prescribers with sales representatives who were encouraged by a generous bonus system” (Psaty& Merrill, 2017). Their campaign was a significant success; “annual sales increased from $48 million to $1.1 billion” (Psaty& Merrill, 2017).
Moreover, the issues produced what the textbook sites as a social issue. These are “typically broad issues that impact companies, group,” and organizations’ concerns that can affect a “significant number of people” (Lawrence & Weber, 2019). I believe every pharmaceuticals manufacturer begins with good intentions to bring to the market the best drug they could to help fight pain and other sicknesses. Additionally, with most companies, their purpose is to maximize its long-term market value and money for its shareholders (McChesney, 2020). But at the same time, firms are to “create value for society” (McChesney, 2020). When the firm purpose is compromised, it creates gaps, and these issues “often indicate there is a gap between” what the organization “wants to do or is doing and what the stakeholders “expect (Lawrence & Weber, 2019). Purdue Pharmaceuticals possibly understood the severity of these issues. Because they put together public education programs to educate patients on the proper handling, storage, and disposal of medications, and the risks of accidental exposure or diversion of medicines that are not stored securely (Purdue Pharmaceuticals, 2020). They also “encouraged prescribers to register and use Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs” (Purdue Pharmaceuticals, 2020).
“Purdue Pharmaceuticals resisted efforts to change the dosing recommendations for its long-acting opioid OxyContin to protect its revenues” (McCarthy, 2016). So, if a company goes to great links to turn a profit by using “misleading statements about addiction risk which amounted to misbranding” (Psaty& Merrill, 2017), then maybe it is possible for pharmaceuticals manufacturers to increase the dosages in the prescription painkillers that contribute to the opioid epidemic. It seems Purdue Pharmaceuticals disregarded stakeholder’s expectations in this process. They pushed the people’s opinions, attitudes, and beliefs about what constitutes reasonable business behavior (chapter 2 class presentation) aside for their own gains.
Purdue Pharmaceuticals “failed to understand the stakeholder’s” (Lawrence & Weber, 2019) and their resisted efforts to change the dosing recommendations for its long-acting opioid OxyContin to protect its revenues (McCarthy, 2016). Because of their resistance, it caused the expectation gap to grow, which results in “backlash” to the company (Lawrence & Weber, 2019).
Purdue Pharmaceuticals eventually had to pay over “$634 million in fines” (Psaty& Merrill, 2017) relate to their conduct of manipulation of the people. Other examples may be seen as people begin to push back on companies like Purdue. Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri launched a Senate investigation into the marketing practice of Pharmaceuticals companies over opioid painkillers (Lyon, 2017). In the end, we can look back to the word of God, as it makes mention in Matthew 16:26; “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?”
Discussion Board Reply-
Week 1 DB2
What is a Stakeholder?
Stakeholders have invested interest in a company. Should a manager be a stakeholder? Yes, the managers should be considered stakeholders because the supervisors have invested their time, money, and dedication into a business. For example, when dealing with public issues the public will look to the manager to resolve all widespread issues. “Managers and organizations have good reason to identity emergent expectations as early as possible (Lawrence & Weber, 2019, para. 2).” “Failure to understand stakeholder concerns and to respond appropriately will permit the performance expectations gap to grow (para.2).”
First, for example, manager is at showing up for work on time and stay late if necessary. Second, the personal cash managers spend on gas to get to work, money on the clothing to look presentable for work. Third, a supervisor’s dedication to stick with being in charge of their employees. Generally, it is easier for managers to resign, and then let several workers rely on them to resolve conflicts and customer complaints.
For example, a hired hand may come to work with a personal problem, something unrelated to work (example: Employee has a sick child at home, and needs to consult a manager). Overseers must be careful how they handle those types of emotions when employees have those feelings. If this situation persists for too long and is ignored, a worker may become unaware, be moved by the gun, take it to work, shoot at their boss, and fire at everyone on the scene. All because the boss would not give them the day off to take care of their own kid. In all cultures, those shooting situations at work are becoming more common, normal, and acceptable. When all the manager had to do is talk to the employee shift some workers around to give them a single off day, it would help the team as a whole. Because, a clear minded in an his, her, their, etc. employee whose head is on straight is better than a worker who cannot focus on work because they are thinking about their home life problems. Therefore, managers must sympathize with all employed colleagues.
The Shareholder theory of the firm
With the shareholders’ theory, the firm is seen as the property of its owner (Lawrence & Weber, 2019). This means that managers own shares in the company. Stakeholder relationships are power associations and this event is good for a head because their strength is leadership (Felipe-Lucia & Martín-López & Lavorel & Berraquero-Díaz &Escalera-Reyes &Comín, 2015). For example, the executive relationship with employees includes the ability to discipline and / or correct workers. “(Job 34:4 New International Version) let us discern for ourselves what is right; let us learn together what is good.” Allow the principal to learn the power relationships of the shareholder’s theory of the firm through the inner dynamics and workings with the Shareholder theory of the firm.
The Benefits of the Manager becoming a Shareholder. It is in the interest of managers to become shareholders. One of the advantages of shareholders is that they are descriptive, instrumental, and normative (Lawernce& Weber, 2019) “Our results revealed that the strongest power was held by those stakeholders who managed (Felipe-Lucia, 2015).”
Another benefit of the manager being a shareholder is the knowledge of knowing about the corporate tax.
“For example, multinationals such as Amazon, Starbucks, and Google have triggered a debate on what constitutes an acceptable level of coporate level tax payment (acceptable level of coporate level tax payment (Hillenbrand & Money & Brooks & Tovstiga, (2019).”
Discussion Board Reply:
