Tom's of Maine Case Study
471 views
Skip to first unread message
Celine
Nov 6, 2009, 10:28:06 PM11/6/09
to PEM_Bergin
Hi Everyone!
Thanks so much to Tithi for getting the pages scanned. Here are just
my thoughts on the questions posed by the case. It's just a starting
point to start discussions and all that.
Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger
company.*
Personally, I don't think Tom's of Maine should merge with a larger
company. It is evident by Chappell's 7 intentions, that he is not in
it for the money alone. The basic philosophy of the company is to
ensure ethical business standards and to serve the greater good. The
company prides itself on it's uncompromising morals, and therefore a
merger with a larger corporation for which the bottom line is the
driving factor in business is ill-advised. Tom's of Maine was able to
adhere to their ethical standards and work out what works for them.
They have established charitable programs and donated money to
charity. Selling to a major company would clearly taint their
reputation for fairness and ethical business practices. Tom's should
remain independent. As he states in his own Intentions: "Know thyself,
be thyself."
*How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?*
Personally, I don't believe that Chappell's approach to ethics will
work at a larger company. Tom Chappell has a very clearly defined set
of ethical standards to which he lives his life and runs his company
by, and there are not many large corporations that will be willing to
adhere to his guidelines. He would be hard-pressed to find a large
company that will sacrifice 5% of it's employee's work time to
charity. It is rare for a company to not be driven by the bottom line,
and while he may fight to incorporate these standards in his new
position as a cog in a conglomerate, it is very unlikely that his
parent company will adopt his philosophy of "common good capitalism".
Thanks so much to Tithi for getting the pages scanned. Here are just
my thoughts on the questions posed by the case. It's just a starting
point to start discussions and all that.
Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger
company.*
Personally, I don't think Tom's of Maine should merge with a larger
company. It is evident by Chappell's 7 intentions, that he is not in
it for the money alone. The basic philosophy of the company is to
ensure ethical business standards and to serve the greater good. The
company prides itself on it's uncompromising morals, and therefore a
merger with a larger corporation for which the bottom line is the
driving factor in business is ill-advised. Tom's of Maine was able to
adhere to their ethical standards and work out what works for them.
They have established charitable programs and donated money to
charity. Selling to a major company would clearly taint their
reputation for fairness and ethical business practices. Tom's should
remain independent. As he states in his own Intentions: "Know thyself,
be thyself."
*How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?*
Personally, I don't believe that Chappell's approach to ethics will
work at a larger company. Tom Chappell has a very clearly defined set
of ethical standards to which he lives his life and runs his company
by, and there are not many large corporations that will be willing to
adhere to his guidelines. He would be hard-pressed to find a large
company that will sacrifice 5% of it's employee's work time to
charity. It is rare for a company to not be driven by the bottom line,
and while he may fight to incorporate these standards in his new
position as a cog in a conglomerate, it is very unlikely that his
parent company will adopt his philosophy of "common good capitalism".
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 7, 2009, 3:11:54 PM11/7/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Celine. I think what you wrote is great, much better than what I wrote, but maybe they can be combined or something. Dr. S said there would be a panel to submit this in Assignments, but I haven't seen it yet on Blackboard. This has to be submitted by 4pm on Monday, 2 hours before class. Here's my take on the questions, see what you all think:
Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger company:
From reading this case, Tom’s of Maine would not be well-served by merging with a larger company. Tom Chappell has shown through his actions that he wants to run a company that makes environmentally safe products, as well as wanting his employees to share his sense of caring about the environment and people. This is obvious from the company’s mission statement, which emphasizes corporate and social responsibility. He also mentioned that attending Harvard Divinity School enabled him to be a better leader. This shows that he thinks of management and ethics as more of a moral responsibility to employees, customers, and the world in general. Although these general ideas are generally incorporated into most companies, I am not sure to what extent a large company would be able to maintain the high ethical standards that Tom’s of Maine displays.
How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?
Chappell’s view of ethics appears to be a combination of a utilitarian and moral-rights view. He wants to do the greatest good for the most people, while respecting and protecting fundamental rights of the environment and the world in general. However, some of his methods may not work at a large company. One example is not performing animal testing for any products, which set back the company significantly and delayed approval of their toothpaste by 7 years. In most
large companies, this amount of time for product development would not be tolerated, and if animal testing sped up the product development process, it would happen. Another example is employee volunteering. Tom’s of Maine allows 5% of work time to go to volunteering. Even though this volunteerism resulted in the equivalent of 20 lost work days per month for all employees, Tom’s did not waver from this point. Other large companies do encourage and support volunteerism, of course, but not necessarily to the extent that Tom’s does. Chappell’s present approach to ethics could probably be scaled down to work at a large company.
Its present version probably will not work at a large company.
From: Celine <cmano...@gmail.com>
To: PEM_Bergin <pem_b...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Fri, November 6, 2009 10:28:06 PM
Subject: Tom's of Maine Case Study
Derek Sullivan
Nov 8, 2009, 7:34:38 PM11/8/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
I'll just add to what you wrote Celine since I agree with everything you wrote down.
Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger
company.*
In addition to what you put, Tom's of Maine may eventually need to consider selling the company if Colgate decides to force their hand. It's purely circumstantial but with Colgate owning 84% of the shares, they have the majority control of the company anyway and can dictate major decisions. If these decisions ever conflict with Tom Chappell's beliefs, he may be backed into a corner where he would have to choose between selling the company or just accepting the changes.
*How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?*
It is doubtful that Chappell's approach to ethics would be utilized at a larger company, but it is certainly possible. Most companies nowadays are coming around to the "green" approach but probably not to the same extent as Chappell. The only reason why these companies offer green goods is because it is being marketed that green is good, which makes it sell. In most cases, green products are more expensive to make and can therefore be more expensive to buy. In a struggling economy, green products may not sell as well which would cause companies to make cutbacks. For large companies dealing in common household products, these cutbacks could include eliminating company benefits. For Colgate specifically, this would not be the case because they already sell cheaper, better selling household products that are not green. The very existence of these products, however, already contradicts Chappell's approach.
How do we want to put this all together?
Derek
Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger
company.*
*How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?*
How do we want to put this all together?
Derek
Silvana
Nov 8, 2009, 7:37:25 PM11/8/09
to PEM_Bergin
Hey! I believe both points of view are very good and interesting, i
think the same as Tithi for the first question, but the point that
Celine made are also very interesting and for the socind question you
both made a really good statement and i enjoy that Tithi add some
exaples about why it would not work for a larger company, great job!!!
On 7 nov, 15:11, Tithi Dutta Roy <tithidutta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Celine. I think what you wrote is great, much better than what I wrote, but maybe they can be combined or something. Dr. S said there would be a panel to submit this in Assignments, but I haven't seen it yet on Blackboard. This has to be submitted by 4pm on Monday, 2 hours before class. Here's my take on the questions, see what you all think:
>
> Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger company:
> From reading this case, Tom’s of Maine would not be well-served by merging with a larger company. Tom Chappell has shown through his actions that he wants to run a company that makes environmentally safe products, as well as wanting his employees to share his sense of caring about the environment and people. This is obvious from the company’s mission statement, which emphasizes corporate and social responsibility. He also mentioned that attending Harvard Divinity School enabled him to be a better leader. This shows that he thinks of management and ethics as more of a moral responsibility to employees, customers, and the world in general. Although these general ideas are generally incorporated into most companies, I am not sure to what extent a large company would be able to maintain the high ethical standards that Tom’s of Maine displays.
>
> How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?
> Chappell’s view of ethics appears to be a combination of a utilitarian and moral-rights view. He wants to do the greatest good for the most people, while respecting and protecting fundamental rights of the environment and the world in general. However, some of his methods may not work at a large company. One example is not performing animal testing for any products, which set back the company significantly and delayed approval of their toothpaste by 7 years. In most large companies, this amount of time for product development would not be tolerated, and if animal testing sped up the product development process, it would happen. Another example is employee volunteering. Tom’s of Maine allows 5% of work time to go to volunteering. Even though this volunteerism resulted in the equivalent of 20 lost work days per month for all employees, Tom’s did not waver from this point. Other large companies do encourage and support volunteerism, of
> course, but not necessarily to the extent that Tom’s does. Chappell’s present approach to ethics could probably be scaled down to work at a large company. Its present version probably will not work at a large company.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Celine <cmanoosi...@gmail.com>
think the same as Tithi for the first question, but the point that
Celine made are also very interesting and for the socind question you
both made a really good statement and i enjoy that Tithi add some
exaples about why it would not work for a larger company, great job!!!
On 7 nov, 15:11, Tithi Dutta Roy <tithidutta...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Celine. I think what you wrote is great, much better than what I wrote, but maybe they can be combined or something. Dr. S said there would be a panel to submit this in Assignments, but I haven't seen it yet on Blackboard. This has to be submitted by 4pm on Monday, 2 hours before class. Here's my take on the questions, see what you all think:
>
> Consider whether Tom’s should stay independent or merge with a larger company:
> From reading this case, Tom’s of Maine would not be well-served by merging with a larger company. Tom Chappell has shown through his actions that he wants to run a company that makes environmentally safe products, as well as wanting his employees to share his sense of caring about the environment and people. This is obvious from the company’s mission statement, which emphasizes corporate and social responsibility. He also mentioned that attending Harvard Divinity School enabled him to be a better leader. This shows that he thinks of management and ethics as more of a moral responsibility to employees, customers, and the world in general. Although these general ideas are generally incorporated into most companies, I am not sure to what extent a large company would be able to maintain the high ethical standards that Tom’s of Maine displays.
>
> How would Chappell’s approach to ethics work at a larger company?
> Chappell’s view of ethics appears to be a combination of a utilitarian and moral-rights view. He wants to do the greatest good for the most people, while respecting and protecting fundamental rights of the environment and the world in general. However, some of his methods may not work at a large company. One example is not performing animal testing for any products, which set back the company significantly and delayed approval of their toothpaste by 7 years. In most large companies, this amount of time for product development would not be tolerated, and if animal testing sped up the product development process, it would happen. Another example is employee volunteering. Tom’s of Maine allows 5% of work time to go to volunteering. Even though this volunteerism resulted in the equivalent of 20 lost work days per month for all employees, Tom’s did not waver from this point. Other large companies do encourage and support volunteerism, of
> course, but not necessarily to the extent that Tom’s does. Chappell’s present approach to ethics could probably be scaled down to work at a large company. Its present version probably will not work at a large company.
>
> ________________________________
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 8, 2009, 8:55:29 PM11/8/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Everything sounds great. I am going to copy everyone's answers into one document and see what sounds good and send it to everyone. Dr. S still hasn't put up a thing in the Assignment section for this, I assume that will happen tomorrow. Once this is done, let's make sure everyone has the document so that we can all hand it in separately. Thanks.
From: Silvana <shiv...@gmail.com>
To: PEM_Bergin <pem_b...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, November 8, 2009 7:37:25 PM
Subject: Re: Tom's of Maine Case Study
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 8, 2009, 11:34:00 PM11/8/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Hi everyone,
Here is the final assignment. All I did was take everyone's answers and combine them, along with some editing. See what you think. Thanks.
Tithi
From: Tithi Dutta Roy <tithid...@yahoo.com>
To: pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 8, 2009 8:55:29 PM
Derek Sullivan
Nov 9, 2009, 11:36:49 AM11/9/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Well the assignment is finally up... It's due 11/16 now(probably because he was so late) and has turned it into a 2-3 page business memo. This should be pretty easy to adapt into one.
Derek Sullivan
Nov 15, 2009, 10:46:40 AM11/15/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Has anyone gotten a start on the memo yet? If not, I'm going to take a stab at it in about an hour.
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 15, 2009, 11:04:00 AM11/15/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Derek,
I was going to get started on it now and get it to conform with Dr. S' case study method. We can both work on it and see what we get. Sound good?
Tithi
From: Derek Sullivan <dcsu...@mail.usf.edu>
To: pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 15, 2009 10:46:40 AM
To: pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 15, 2009 10:46:40 AM
Derek Sullivan
Nov 15, 2009, 3:20:11 PM11/15/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Here's what I have so far. We need a little bit more about "alternatives" and definitely need a conclusion. Any takers? Don't forget to look at this requirements in: http://www.uiweb.uidaho.edu/ag/agecon/391/casestudmeth.html
Derek
Derek
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 15, 2009, 9:29:37 PM11/15/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
I added a little alternatives and conclusion section combined into one, I couldn't really come up with much else. I think it sounds great otherwise. I made a few grammatical changes, but that's it. Let me know if everyone is ok with this, and then this can go to the Assignments section. He said only one copy needs to be submitted per group, but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us to submit, just in case. Thanks.
Sent: Sun, November 15, 2009 3:20:11 PM
Angela Garcia-Aker
Nov 16, 2009, 9:13:36 AM11/16/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Hi Tithi,
It looks gret and ready to submit. I really appreciate it! Thanks!
-Angela Aker
--
Angela Garcia Aker
Vice President, X-Labs
Department of Electrical Engineering
University of South Florida
(813) 298.6403
agar...@gmail.com
Angela Garcia Aker
Vice President, X-Labs
Department of Electrical Engineering
University of South Florida
(813) 298.6403
agar...@gmail.com
Derek Sullivan
Nov 16, 2009, 11:55:40 AM11/16/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Looks good to me. If there are no objections in the next hour, I'll go ahead and submit it.
Derek
Derek
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 16, 2009, 12:14:39 PM11/16/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Cool! Thanks again to Derek for making it sound great. OK, Derek can go ahead and submit it. Just top be on the safe side, I will submit it as well. I figure it doesn't hurt. Thanks!
Tithi Dutta Roytithid...@yahoo.com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 11:55:40 AM
Daniel Bergin
Nov 16, 2009, 10:16:05 PM11/16/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Excellent work Derek, Tithi and Celine! Sorry I have been absent the past week, have been on another planet or something. Thanks so much, I will see everyone at the meeting Wednesday if that is still on. Take care.
Dan
Tithi Dutta Roy
Nov 18, 2009, 6:27:08 AM11/18/09
to pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Yeah, we definitely need to meet as a group on Wednesday at 6pm. I looked online this morning, and there's still no schedule up on who talks when, so we may as well be ready for Monday. All righty, talk tonight at 6pm. : )
Tithi
From: Daniel Bergin <dber...@gmail.com>
To: pem_b...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Mon, November 16, 2009 10:16:05 PM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages