Monsanto Solutions

Group case study

Section 6:

Main problem ~ MonSanto is choosing to seek what is best for their bottom line,as opposed to human well-being. Their practices are unsustainable. They are skewing the minds of consumers by false advertising and promoting unhealthy products to children.

One of the threats to Monsanto is that public perception is narrowing in on their deceptive practices. To fix this problem they could adjust their business practices to reflect what is better for consumers, or adopt more healthful, sustainable food. Here a other solutions for fixing their central problems:

Instead of seeking to positively impact their bottom line through deceptive tactics, they should seek to increase sales by improving their current products. Intensive strategies- product development

Pros: increased sales, favorable opinion from consumers.

Cons: people do not like the improved products, improving products could compromise manufacturing efficiency creating loss of soft dollars - ultimately could lead to diminishing returns.

They should develop new products or services that are healthy and sustainable. Intensive strategies- product development

Pros: increased sales.

Cons: waste of capital expenditure if new products are not successful.

They should add new, related products. For example, an educational institution that clear their name and educates farmers on sustainable food practices. Or start a not for profit organization that shows they are interested in philanthropic efforts and not just profits. Diversification strategies- related

Pros: clear up their public image, few rivals follow this strategy

Cons: persuading some of the leaders in the company to adopt this strategy could be challenging, outsourcing is an added cost associated with diversification, diversified products/services could be unsuccessful

They should free up some of their assets to brace themselves for public backlash that ultimately will lead to declining sales....