A Beautiful Deal
Case: A beautiful deal
Ethical dilemmas at stake
The company has an opportunity to cut down cost by 2% and this can be the difference in gain in comparison with the competitors. It is also important to state that since they have a really close relationship with their present supplier, changing the supplier would hurt their friendship. The ethical dilemmas start here, at either you do what benefit your company or they hurt their friendship.
Since the company covers 2/3 of the suppliers, Beauty To Go, total business it would also mean that without your contract there will be some impacts for the future and existence of Beauty To Go.
In order for them to continue their business they would have to cut production which in turn will lead to employees getting fired. You need always to remember that retailers have the power over suppliers and their future existence. Another dilemma is that the new supplier raises the standard for ethical awareness which would have you saving 2% on the total cost but also being able to sell more ethical products. So would you risk the future existence of a supplier you have a good friendship and act upon an opportunity that would cut your costs and also have a more distinct product line?
Beauty To Go offers the virtually identical products as Real Cosmetics, however the question is why the latter supplier can offer the products at a lower cost. Supposedly have Beauty To Go been trying to maximize their profits and strategically creating a close relationship to the retailer so he would find it morally wrong to go search for a cheaper supplier.
Real Cosmetics may be doing some questionable business and that is why they can offer the identical products but slightly more ethical to a lower cost. Maybe they are in contract with a factory in a third world country that uses child labor or offering their employees a minimum wage and long hours. This is my preconceived thought of the company, because it is almost impossible to offer a
Ethical dilemmas at stake
The company has an opportunity to cut down cost by 2% and this can be the difference in gain in comparison with the competitors. It is also important to state that since they have a really close relationship with their present supplier, changing the supplier would hurt their friendship. The ethical dilemmas start here, at either you do what benefit your company or they hurt their friendship.
Since the company covers 2/3 of the suppliers, Beauty To Go, total business it would also mean that without your contract there will be some impacts for the future and existence of Beauty To Go.
In order for them to continue their business they would have to cut production which in turn will lead to employees getting fired. You need always to remember that retailers have the power over suppliers and their future existence. Another dilemma is that the new supplier raises the standard for ethical awareness which would have you saving 2% on the total cost but also being able to sell more ethical products. So would you risk the future existence of a supplier you have a good friendship and act upon an opportunity that would cut your costs and also have a more distinct product line?
Beauty To Go offers the virtually identical products as Real Cosmetics, however the question is why the latter supplier can offer the products at a lower cost. Supposedly have Beauty To Go been trying to maximize their profits and strategically creating a close relationship to the retailer so he would find it morally wrong to go search for a cheaper supplier.
Real Cosmetics may be doing some questionable business and that is why they can offer the identical products but slightly more ethical to a lower cost. Maybe they are in contract with a factory in a third world country that uses child labor or offering their employees a minimum wage and long hours. This is my preconceived thought of the company, because it is almost impossible to offer a