Coca-Cola's Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Issue
Assessment Description
Coca-Cola started it business in 1886 in Atlanta, Georgia. Dr. John Stith Pemberton was a local pharmacist who made the syrup that was teamed with soda water and sold at a local pharmacy.
By 1920 the company started expanding internationally. They first sold their products in Canada and the Caribbean, then moved into Asia, Europe, South America, and the Soviet Union. In 2005 it was pronounced the largest manufacturer and distributor or non-alcoholic beverages in the world.
In 2007 they launched a CSR campaign called "Live Positively." The campaign established seven core areas where the company sets itself measurable goals to improve the business’s sustainability practices. The core areas are: beverage benefits, active healthy living, the community, energy and climate, sustainable packaging, water stewardship, and the workplace. They also formed a partnership with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and became a member of the CEO Water Mandate. Water became the company’s more important concerns.
Every year Coca-Cola publishes a report called ‘The Coca-Cola Company Annual Report’ that comprises the company’s activities in that year. The reports describe their initiatives in water preservation and community development. Since 2011 they also publish a report every 2 years called ‘The Coca-Cola Company Sustainability Review’ that are verified by a third party, the FIRA Sustainability Ltd which gives Coca-Cola moderate reliability of the information too.
Against these efforts, Coca-Cola had several conflicts and veracity of their efforts were questioned. In 2003 the Indian NGO Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) published a report that provided evidence of the presence of pesticides in a sample of a dozen Coca-Cola and PepsiCo beverages sold in India. The a level of pesticides found was exceeding European standards. The report gained large publicity and media attention.
The Indian government started an investigation as well and carried out their own tests. The tests did show pesticides in the water, however the amount did not fail European standards. Therefore the conclusion was, that Coca-Cola did not violate any national laws.
Coca-Cola denied the accusations as well as accusations related to having over-exploited and polluted water resources.
In 750-1,000 words respond to the following:
How might Coca-Cola's CSR efforts affect its reputation and bottom line?
What are the key issues that Coca-Cola is facing by deciding to deny the allegations?
Describe whether Coca-Cola violated any of the NCA Credo policies? Provide examples.
How should have Coca-Cola use strategic communication to effectively deal with the problem?
Use three to five scholarly resources to support your explanations.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
The Coca-Cola CSR Issue
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Code and Name
Professor’s Name
Date
The Coca-Cola CSR Issue
How might Coca-Cola's CSR efforts affect its reputation and bottom line?
Coca-Cola is a renowned multinational company that manufactures and distributes non-alcoholic beverages. The company has Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs that enable it to give back to the community. Specifically, social responsibility means a commitment to people and firms to better local communication, particularly where the company operates. The most significant thing about CSR is that it involves emphasizing social and environmental concerns in the planning, management, and operation of an enterprise. On that note, Coca-Cola’s CSR efforts significantly influence its reputation and bottom line. For instance, by launching the 2007 “Live Positively” CSR campaign, Coca-Cola set measurable goals to improve its sustainability practices. The major areas that the firm focused on are the workplace, active healthy living, beverage benefits, the community, sustainable packaging, climate and energy, and water stewardship. As such, Coca-Cola built a positive reputation by showing primary stakeholders, including its customers that it cares for their health. However, if the company fails to meet its established goals in CSR, it can ruin its reputation. Similarly, Coca-Cola’s CSR efforts affect its bottom line, which includes the firm’s profit, net income, earnings per share, and revenues. An enterprise with CSR programs that improve its reputation experiences higher sales and revenues (Kim & Woo, 2019). Nevertheless, a negative CSR or the failure to meet the set goals in social responsibility can make a company experience losses due to its bad reputation.
What are the key issues that Coca-Cola is facing by deciding to deny the allegations?
Coca-Cola is facing primary issues after denying the allegations that some of its beverages had high levels of pesticides. Based on a 2003 report by the Indian Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), the Center for Science and Environment (CSE), samples of PepsiCo and Coca-Cola beverages were found to contain pesticides. The significant problem that Coca-Cola encountered was the partial ban of its products by some state governments in India (Gentleman, 2006). Notably, no government can allow a company to sell its products or services if they are harmful to consumers. The ingredients used in manufacturing beverages should not be above the recommended levels. Since the negative news gained large traction and media attention, it led to the second issue of tarnishing Coca-Cola’s reputation. Denying these allegations might have deteriorated the problem. Although Coca-Cola managed to convince the Indian government that the pesticide levels were not beyond the set European standards recommended for human consumption, the company had already entered into a crisis. Based on a chief executive officer (CEO) and president of Levick Strategic Communications, which is a company in the United States of America (USA), Coca-Cola experienced adverse consequences, and it might take a while before the company regains consumer confidence. The effects of denying potential allegations are far-reaching and detrimental to a firm’s operations. In that light, if something has happened, the company should...