Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Harv Bus Rev ; 70(3): 14-7, 20-3, 26-7, 1992.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10118001

ABSTRACT

After several days of meetings, J.F. Winchester, president of MDC Industries, felt no closer to a decision. MDC, a manufacturer of wall and ceiling panels, was considering whether to exercise an option to buy a new and safer wallboard technology. The product was being touted as revolutionary, but, Winchester wondered, could MDC afford to carry the flag? According to its inventor, Robert Goerner, Smoke-Safe would be a vast improvement over standard safety-rated wallboard. With almost the same flame-retardant properties, Smoke-Safe had the advantage of giving off almost no fumes or smoke in fire tests. And, Winchester knew, most fire-related deaths are from smoke, not flames. Indeed, the numbers were grimly persuasive: 82% of fire-related injuries involving standard panels were caused by smoke inhalation. What's more, Smoke-Safe would cost about the same to manufacture as MDC's current wallboard. But MDC had several other good options for spending the $5 million Goerner was asking; building plastics was only one of its profit centers. And the prospect of launching a campaign to change building codes in order to market Smoke-Safe, which could spark a fight with competitors, was daunting. Since its current wallboard gave MDC only 18% of the wallboard market, many industry insiders speculated whether MDC had the market clout to influence major cities to revise their codes. Six experts in marketing, law, and ethics advise MDC Industries on how it can balance ethical and business imperatives in making its decision.


Subject(s)
Consumer Product Safety , Decision Making, Organizational , Industry/organization & administration , Product Line Management/standards , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Economic Competition , Fires/prevention & control , Models, Theoretical , Organizational Innovation , Product Line Management/economics , United States
2.
Harv Bus Rev ; 67(2): 32-4, 1989.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10313002

ABSTRACT

When it comes to social responsibility, most companies are content to write out checks--often in large numbers--and let it go at that. General Mills is one company that likes to establish operating ventures that involve corporate officers and champion a cause. Such a venture is Altcare, a nonprofit organization designed to find more effective and less expensive ways of caring for elderly people who are getting frail but do not require acute care. In 1983, when the company chose this area as its next project, it realized it needed help from an organization with vast experience in the geriatric field. So it enlisted a nearby organization, the Wilder Foundation, and went into partnership as Altcare. The partnership has launched a service network for victims of Alzheimer's disease, a program with three other institutions to meet the myriad needs of chronically impaired people, and an unusual residence for physically impaired people, among other ventures. Altcare looks for advances and ideas that can be replicated, and the partnership often lends money to entrepreneurs who want to launch pioneering efforts or replicate Altcare initiatives. The cost to General Mills: about $80,000 a year after taxes, plus its share of any losses in project investments incurred by Altcare.


Subject(s)
Foundations , Health Services for the Aged/organization & administration , Industry , Long-Term Care/trends , Aged , Humans , Minnesota , Organizational Affiliation , Organizational Innovation
3.
Harv Bus Rev ; 59(2): 76-95, 1981.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10250059

ABSTRACT

Is sexual harassment a serious issue for managers, and does it occur as much in business as the popular press would have us believe? How difficult will it be to implement the newly issued EEOC guidelines? Out of a joint survey with Redbook magazine, HBR takes a look at these and other questions. Eliza Collins and Timothy Blodgett explore definitions of harassment, analyze respondents' replies, and suggest ways to counter the problem.


Subject(s)
Personnel Management , Sexual Behavior , Women's Rights , Employee Grievances , Female , Humans , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...