Case Study of H.B. Fuller Essay

disbelief No 1 Is H.B.Fuller responsible for the addiction of path children to its Resistol productions? Do you agree or disagree with the statement that the social conditions in Honduras and Guatemala argon ultimately responsible for misuse of H.B. Fuller products and that neither the product nor the society is to blame? Do you agree or disagree that a parent company is non responsible for the activities of its subsidiaries? Explain your answers full. a) I turn int think that H.B.Fuller is responsible. Because the thing is that theyre just doing their business and aught else. Its their right to do whatever business they want. It is just bid that when you go to the well, if the dog fell into the well so what we can do then? The company is just concerned with the business of producing gum tree. To throw the positioning of the company, they need to use best chemicals out of best. It is the duty of the company to maintain the quality. If there isnt any substitute of that glue then theyre helpless.They cant hang their company. b) If we talk or so the children who were affected by the habit of sniveling the glue, children can understand what is right and what is wrong if theyre the dowry of the company. If theyre sniffing the glue, it is up to them. partnership never said about that. To sniff the glue is their action why the company should be blame? c) Of socio-economic class Im agreeing with the statement that H.B.Fuller is non responsible for the activities of its subsidiary. To let the children complete about the duties and precaution is the responsibility of the company. If the children are habitual of this thing, then I just want to say that its very hard to make for rid of any type addiction. One more thing that I want to discuss is that when Im drinker then whats the problem with you? I know about the side effects of this thing. So in this case, company isparent it is right only theyre not taking work from the children for the sake of Alla h. Company is paying for what they are doing for the business. Question No 2 In your judgment did H.B.Fuller conduct itself in a mor whollyy appropriate manner? Explain your answer. In my point of view, Its I think a right(a) step which the company interpreted that they stopped selling of that glue in small jars. If the glue is usable in small jars, children have the maximum chance to buy that glue because it is affordable for them.When the company is selling that glue in bouffant coat of containers, it becomes much easier to protect the children from using the glue. Because large size of containers must not be in reach of children. Well not go for utilitarianism because life is the and thing which is priceless. Company should care about the health of children. They did a good job but it costs the company very much. by and by all they are running their business in a very large scale having revenue more than $1 Billion (1995). They have constitute the safe way to protect thems elves from winding up the company.Question No 3 What, if anything, should the company have done that it did not do? After considering the whole case, we have got something which is not done by the company but the company should do. The company should advice the children about the use of this glue and also alive(predicate) the government about this product. I think, after advising the children there might be less chances of spreading disease. Children could be protected from the harmful outcomes. There are some more points which should be taken into the account by the company Company should mention the precautions on their product about the usage of the product. Company should start the campaign regarding the usage of the product. Company should advice the children time to time about the usage and drawbacks of the product.