Recreation & Sports Equipment Corporation sells a product that is capable of seriously injuring consumers who misuse it in a foreseeable way. Does the firm owe an ethical duty to take this product off the market? What conflicts might arise if the firm stops selling this product?

Answer 1

Ethical behavior can sometimes generate sufficient good will to warrant practicing it out of a desire for increased profits. By the same token, unethical behavior can sometimes generate enough bad publicity to warrant avoiding it out of the same desire. A business firm's activities that are perceived as ethical and receive wide publicity can benefit the firm's owners in the short run-and even in the long run if the firm's enhanced public image continues to attract more consumers to its products.
There is nothing unethical about making a profit. It is the behavior that generates the profit that can be questionable. Business ethics thus has a practical element. A business firm should act in its best interest. A firm interested in profits should also be interested in the public's opinion.
Of course, it is not a company's fault when consumers misuse its product. If continuing to sell a product is not a strict violation of the law, stopping its sale would likely reduce profits. This could impact the firm's owners, employees, and others. But suspending sales could reduce injuries, and it could lead to increased profits from the sales of other products, if the suspension stops negative publicity.
When a business entity decides to respond to what it sees as a moral or ethical obligation by removing a product from the market, an ethical conflict is raised between the firm and its employees and between the firm and its shareholders. This conflict arises directly out of the impact that the decision has on the firm's profits. If meeting this perceived obligation increases the firm's profitability, then all parties "win" and the dilemma would be easily resolved in favor of "doing the right thing."?