Monsanto has
various primary and secondary stakeholders to consider. Stakeholders are
“customers, investors and shareholders, employees, suppliers, government
agencies, communities, and many others who have a “stake” or claim in some
aspect of a company’s products, operations, markets, industry, and outcomes”.


The primary
concern for stakeholders are about the negative effects on the environment and
ecosystem while growing with GMO seeds.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now


No, Monsanto seems
to have recently tried, but still fails to even create an ethical culture that
can effectively respond to various stakeholders. Organizations face significant
risks from strategies and also from employees striving for high performance standards.

Such pressure sometimes encourages employees to engage in illegal or unethical
conduct. All firms have these concerns, and in the case of Monsanto bribes and
patents have resulted in legal, ethical and reputational consequences. Considering
how many problems over how long of a time Monsanto has made them, they
continually get legislation regarding their product passed in countries,
including America, through unethical means. Their product in itself harms the
stakeholders they have identified in both direct and indirect ways, from
endocrine disrupting, teratogenic, and carcinogenic effects, as well as the
weakening of the life support systems of our planet. Before an ethical culture
can be achieved, an ethical product must be considered and implemented


The benefits of
growing genetically modified seeds could be an amazing opportunity
for humanity to create unparalleled abundance. They represent a product of
hundreds of years observing life and studying it, reducing it down to its
parts to understand it. Given time, nearly any gene could be expressed in
any organism to help facilitate adaptation to new, emerging conditions. However,
there are some major problems. The first is the amount of study of
the effects of these technologies is in its infancy.

As Americans, we’re basically the biggest, longest running experiment
of GMO’s on humans due to the speed with which Monsanto has had legislation
passed. The repercussions of reducing bio-diversity by introducing poison into
the ecosystem to the advantage of a single species are fairly well understood.

Recycling of sinks and sources in a biological system with high
bio-diversity represent sustainability, Monsanto’s implementation
of genetically modified organisms runs directly counter with this
scientific knowledge.


Monsanto Co. Should change its advertising for
glyphosate- based products, including Roundup, that are misleading. The
advertising inaccurately portrayed Monsanto’s glyphosate-containing products as
safe and as not causing any harmful effects to people or the environment.

According to the state, the ads also implied that the risks of products such as
Roundup are the same as those of the active ingredient, glyphosate, and do not
take into account the possible risks associated with the product’s inert
ingredients. The only ethical way to manage this, from nearly any of the
standpoints discussed in the teleology and the deontology system to the
value ethics is to co