Killer Coker- The Campaign Against Coca-Cola
Case Summary
The case delves into the violation of human rights by Coca-Cola Colombia, a wholly-owned Coca-Cola subsidiary responsible for the production and distribution of Coca-Cola products in Colombia. The subsidiary is accused of hiring militia to intimidate and kill trade union leaders advocating for labour rights. The unions particularly claim that the company hired a right-hand militia, the United Self Defence Forces of Colombia (AUC), who murdered nine trade union officials across the company’s bottling plants across the country. One of the trade unions, the Colombian Food and Drink Union Sinaltrainal, sued the Coca-Cola Company at a Miami Court over the killing of its members (Lawrence & Beamish, 2013). Do you need any help for completing your assignment ? Contact us at eminencepapers.com. We endeavor to provide you with excellent service.
The incidents at Coca-Cola bottling plants happened against the backdrop of a strong anti-globalization campaign. There were growing concerns in the country about getting rid of the damaging effects of large international corporations (Sibylla Brodzinsky, 2003). Among other reasons, these companies are accused of degrading people’s culture, local food, and overall way of life. The movement also sought to preserve human rights and the environment. Due to the increasing global concerns about the issue, the anti-globalization movement received support across the world, including support from Coca-Cola’s nerve in the US. Other than Coca-Cola, other entities targeted by the anti-globalization movement include sweatshops belonging to Nike and Gap.
Following the creation of the killer Coke campaign, the issue gained notoriety among young consumers. As a result, the company had no option but to explain its part of the story (Lawrence & Beamish, 2013). That included sending its top executives to different colleges across the Americas and Europe to state Coca-Cola’s case. Further, the company later contracted the Cal Safety Corporation to audit the Colombian bottling plants and ascertain the allegations raised against the company.
Critical Aspects in the Case
Coke’s Abuses in Colombia
The case study brings Coca-Cola’s human rights abuses to light. The case records facts for incidents that occurred in the 2000s. However, the company’s abusive tendencies are not a new phenomenon. The company has been characterized by a poor image since the 1980s and 70s. For instance, the issues alleged to have happened across the company’s bottling plants are a replica of what happened in Guatemala in the 80s and 70s.
Audit Failure
Following the unfortunate incidents at Coke’s bottling plants, the Killer Coke campaign was launched. The campaign took an international path when parties from the US joined in to hold the company accountable. For instance, American universities banned Coke products from their campuses. Some of the campuses that banned the company’s products include Michigan University, NYU, and Rutgers, among other campuses and colleges across the US. The company hoped that conducting an audit would yield positive outcomes, but that failed. One of the reasons for the rejection of the audit report is the company’s bad history when dealing with audits (Lawrence & Beamish, 2013). Apparently, Cal Care Company gives positive reports on companies it audits since it is a for-profit company.
Ethical Issues
The case also raises serious ethical issues the company has faced over the past three decades. Since the 1990s, the company has faced several ethical issues. Most of these ethical issues border around anti-competitiveness, racial discrimination, channel staffing, and intimidation of union workers. Such issues have had a negative reputation on the company’s reputation. For instance, in 2000, the company was dropped from America’s list of Most Admired Companies. Coca-Cola was also dropped from Business Ethics Magazine’s Best Corporate Citizens list. For a company that had dominated the lists in the previous years, the drop was a clear sign that the company was failing in its ethical obligations (Center for Ethical Organizational Cultures, n.d.).
Selecting Critical Aspects
Understanding the topic on which the case is focused was the initial and most important step in identifying the critical aspects of the case. The topic, in this case, revolves around global leadership and overall global corporate behaviour. Having realized that, I focused on selecting issues that relate to the global management of businesses. International businesses serve a wide population, meaning they must take care of many interests. One such important responsibility of global companies is corporate responsibility. As a global citizen, Coca-Cola plays an important role on the global stage. The company attains that by engaging in activities that promote the well-being of the public. Due to Coca-Cola’s participation in corporate social responsibility (CSR), the company has previously received accolades for its CSR activities.
Another important issue that arose from the case is the human rights abuses by the Coca-Cola Company. Globalization of businesses leads to economic globalization, which implies that the activities of a company can affect many people across the world. Coca-Cola, despite being a symbol of the corporate world, also represents poor human rights practices (International Labor Rights Forum, 2019). The company’s poor human rights record ranges from water privatization, abuse of labour rights leaders, and abuse of employees’ rights, among other economic malpractices. Unfortunately, these issues affect some of the poorest populations in the world. The Colombian case brings to light the discrimination of some of the poorest populations in the world.
Furthermore, the importance of effective auditing emerged from the case. Most decisions in international businesses are made at the head office. However, unscrupulous subsidiary leaders may make mistakes and sanction actions that go against the company policy. Coca-Cola Colombia’s actions were likely sanctioned by the subsidiary’s heads (Lawrence & Beamish, 2013). That indicates an apparent disconnect between the head office and the subsidiaries.
Outcomes, Solutions and/or Resolutions from the Case
One of the outcomes of the Killer Coke campaign was a negative sentiment among young consumers. More specifically, college students organized to have Coca-Cola products to be banned from their institutions. These students were also agitating for the cancellation of active contracts their institutions were having with the Coca-Cola Company. Some of the most notorious institutions that agitated for Coca-Cola to be punished include Rutgers University, with a 51,000 student population, and the University of Michigan, with a 39,000 student population. The boycotts revealed Coca-Cola’s underbelly.
On their part, Coca-Cola chose aggressive public relations (PR) efforts in response to the crisis (Lawrence & Beamish, 2013). The company did not make an effort to establish the accuracy of the allegations made against them. To clean its image, Coca-Cola sent officials from its head office and representatives from the Colombian subsidiary to argue their case. The company buried its head in the sand regarding the substantive issues raised from its actions in its Colombia bottling plants.
Reflection
A central theme from the Killer Coke campaign is that the Coca-Cola Company has created a dominant global brand seeking to entrench global capitalism. Based on its large size, Coca-Cola can influence countries to accommodate their interests. Consequently, the company has used this influence to disenfranchise communities.
First, Coca-Cola’s capitalism is evidenced by the company’s decision to outsource expensive and risky operations to others. For instance, the company outsources most of its bottling plants to local players (Freudenberg, 2015). The decision is informed by the expensive nature of building new bottling plants. Although the company made attempts to buy some of these bottling plants, their efforts flopped due to non-profitability. Besides, the company outsources sugar and coffee plantations, exposing locals to the risky business. In Colombia, the decision to outsource bottling plant operations enabled people who do not care about the company’s ethical standards to take control. That explains why the owners and officials of these bottling plants brazenly ordered the intimidation, torture, and even the killing of trade union officials.
Another issue that shows Coca-Cola’s capitalism is its effort to look for local players who take care of their interests. For instance, restaurants and food outlets benefit from selling Coke products, making them a strong sales force. Producers of coffee and sugar also benefit as the company gets more sales. Such people will do anything to ensure their profits keep flowing, even if it means participating in human rights abuses (Freudenberg, 2015).
Finally, globalization has enabled Coca-Cola’s capitalism. If the company realizes the cost of inputs or labour goes up in one region, it moves operations to places where the production cost is low. Latin America, Asia, and Africa are some of the targets for cheap production (Freudenberg, 2015). Countries in these regions lack regulatory frameworks to control Coca-Cola’s capitalist tendencies.
References
Center for Ethical Organizational Cultures. (n.d.). The Coca-Cola Company Struggles with Ethical Crises. https://harbert.auburn.edu/binaries/documents/center-for-ethical-organizational-cultures/cases/coca-cola.pdf
Freudenberg, N. (2015). Killer Coke. The American Interest. https://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/02/03/killer-coke/
International Labor Rights Forum. (2019). 2005 List: the 14 Worst Corporate Evildoers | International Labor Rights Forum. Laborrights.org. https://laborrights.org/in-the-news/2005-list-14-worst-corporate-evildoers
Lawrence, J. T., & Beamish, P. W. (2013). Globally responsible leadership: Managing according to the UN global compact. Sage Publications.
Sibylla Brodzinsky. (2003). Coca-Cola boycott launched after killings at Colombian plants. The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2003/jul/24/marketingandpr.colombia
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
W1 Assignment: Complete Case I: Killer Coker: The Campaign Against Coca-Cola (pgs. 149-173) and address the following directives:
1. Carefully READ the entire CASE first, and review again the chapter(s) pertaining to the case(s). Take time to think critically about all of the aspects of the case(s).
Killer Coker- The Campaign Against Coca-Cola
2. Write a brief Overview/Summary of the case in your own words describing the nature and/or background information pertaining to the case. (Minimum 1/2 -1 page)
3. In your opinion, what were some Critical Aspects in the case that were identified? What were some Critical Aspects that you perceived to be very vital? (Minimum 1 page)
4. How were you able to make those Assessments of selecting the critical aspects or components for the case author/writer and for yourself? (Minimum 1 page)
5. Identify and/or list some of the Outcomes, Solutions and/or Resolutions you extrapolated from the case. (Minimum 1 page)
6. Write a Reflection on what you learned from the case pertaining to global leadership. (Minimum 1 page)
Papers should follow current APA guidelines in terms of type, margins, and citations and address the following areas:
– Address the actual assignment topic. Consult the instructor for additional information or clarity on assignment instructions.
– Cover the assignment topic in sufficient detail and depth, with scholarly sources to support claims.
– The content should reflect ample use of required readings and other course materials.
– The Case Analysis Rubric provides grading guidelines.