Keurig Company and Environmental Conservation
Environmental degradation and its effect are the central issue addressed in the case of Keurig K-cup. According to the scenario presented, the pods produced by the company are non-biodegradable, thus causing severe concern to environmentalists. The issue has threatened to erode the gains made by Keurig K-cup goods as outstanding in terms of quality and neatness. From the case presented, observers have noted with concern how the company products have been forming heaps of waste in different parts of the world. Environmentalists have blamed the firm for acting slowly on the calls to develop biodegradable products that are friendly to the environment. However, Keurig has taken specific steps in environmental conservation. For example, the company manufactures single-serve pods, which significantly saves electricity.
Justification of Critics’ Claims against Keurig
Critics have acted most ordinarily while pointing out issues with Keurig K-cup products. The company has taken a long to address the environmental issue brought about by their commodities from the case presented. According to the instance given, other related organizations switched to recyclable and biodegradable cups from 2012 as a sign of being environmentally responsible. It means that Keurig K-cup had enough time to make the appropriate changes and start producing pods that pose little danger to the environment. Another assertion that justifies critics' attack is the failure of the company to keep its promise. In 2014, Monique Oxender, the chief sustainability officer, promised to transform its products into an environmental-friendly form by 2020. This goal is yet to be achieved, thus demonstrating its reluctance to implement measures meant to conserve the environment. The Keurig’s management needs to listen to the concerns of environmentalists as an ethical responsibility. They should take the conservation issue seriously by producing cups that are easily recycled or biodegradable (DiSegni, Huly, & Akron, 2015) . The company does not also have to wait for critics to raise specific issues to act. It should be its responsibility to address various social factors like environmental conservation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Social Obligation in Keurig’s Proposed Actions
Keurig’s proposed actions will be best described as a social obligation. This term means that the company undertakes them by considering the legal and economic implications (Hamidu, Haron, & Amran, 2015) . The first demonstration of Keurig’s social obligation is in its promise to convert to biodegradable manufacturing products. This action came after conservationists’ outcry about their products’ effect on the environment. Secondly, the company seems more motivated by sales, oblivious to some of its social effects. According to its mission, Keurig intends to dominate the beverage brewing business by making commodities that fit any occasion. It doesn’t point anywhere the company's social responsibility, like charity and environmental conservation. This assertion means that the business is mostly driven by sales and profit in designing some of their goods. For instance, Keurig has developed single-serve pods that significantly reduce electricity usage. This move might not be due to social responsibility but intended to attract more customers due to its uniqueness.
Meaning of the Statement "Environmental Awareness is never a Bad Thing."
The statement “environmental awareness is never a bad thing” expresses the view Keurig has about conservation. Its use in the context means that the company is aware of society's benefits from conserving the environment. This suggestion might explain why the Keurig has uniquely designed their products, such as single-serve pods that save electricity. The statement may also mean that the organization does not give much thought to critics who criticize it for not preserving the environment. Keurig sees them as overreacting and exaggerating the effect of their products on the environment. It sees sensitization without much action as enough in the conservation process.
References
DiSegni, D. M., Huly, M., & Akron, S. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, environmental leadership and financial performance. Social Responsibility Journal . https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-02-2013-0024
Hamidu, A. A., Haron, H. M., & Amran, A. (2015). Corporate social responsibility: A review on definitions, core characteristics and theoretical perspectives. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences . https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n4p83
