Introduction
The salient features of this crisis that occurred to DuPont, one of the giant chemical companies in the world occurred, because its association with the production and sale of Chlorofluocarbon (CFC). Scientists and researchers were of the considered opinion that CFC is positively harmful to the global environment and have reduced the ozone concentration in the earth. (The State of New Zealand’s Environment: Chapter 5: The State of our Atmosphere).
Aspects of CFC
They believed that, unlike other chemicals, CFC does not break down into molecular particles until they reach the earth’s stratosphere, but before that time, they are capable of causing harm to outer ozone layer of the earth, which, in turn could lead to long term potential health hazards to living inhabitants on earth.
Another factor was in terms of the fact that CFC inputs was a global phenomenon, with heavy infrastructure and investments put into place, by global companies, and therefore, its production could not be stopped or suspended, until alternatives were tested and approved for use. For a company like DuPont, CFC was the lifeline that supported many of its premier products and DuPont contributed to nearly 50% of the total CFC usage in the world.
However public opinion and political pressures began to build up against DuPont’s unrestricted use of CFC and the company was constrained to take cognizance of them.
During these times of public, political and administrative buildups against the use of CFC, the DuPont maintained a strong façade and tactfully announced that it was in the process of studying and testing alternatives to CFC, but this could take nearly 5-8 years, since producing commercial alternatives to CFC was indeed a challenging enterprise.
Search for new alternatives
During 1988, the Company announced that new alternatives were being tested and other measures for curbing the harmful effects of CFC through testing mechanisms.
However, during March 1988, the Ozone Trend Panel (OTP) declared that CFC was responsible for 2% decrease in ozone layer. DuPont’s public relations (PR) were put under pressure, including the announcement made by the former Chairman of the Board of Directors of DuPont, Mr. Irving Shapiro, to the effect that DuPont would discontinue usage of CFC if it was conclusively proved that CFC was an environmentally hazardous material. (Risciotti).
Risks of DuPont PR
The stance taken by the PR of DuPont was not of confrontation but Pacifist, since their paramount concern to keep aspects of global health and welfare above business interests. And it was this reason that the media maintained a neutral and non-derogatory attitude towards the CFC issue in DuPont. The views maintained by the PR were in terms of the company’s efforts to find alternative solutions for the CFC imbroglio and to strive to seek and implement solutions that could solve this problem permanently, to restore public confidence and esteem for this prestigious global company.
DuPont embarked on a new policy of finding a suitable replacement for CFC and also decided to systematically phase out use of CFC production over a period of time. This was reiterated by their PR over the media and was well received by the public. As a matter of fact, the attitude of DuPont to submit to media scrutiny and transparency in its dealings was well received.
There were other aspects for their PR officials to work on. Information about DuPont’s activities regarding CFC could be gained not only from DuPont PR officials, but also through other channels like their competitors, from Commercial Institutions, Chamber of Commerce, and other public and private individual sources. The fact that versions presented by DuPont spokesmen should not be distorted or manipulated by other sources was critical since it would show the company in bad light and have implications on the stock movements and future prospects of the company.
There have been instance of DuPont indulging in hazardous environmental risks concerning sustainability, resulting in lawsuits and consequent losses for the company.
Sustainability is akin to three legged stool
It is to be remembered that sustainable development is very much akin to a three legged stool, the three legs of the development stool being economic development, environmental caring and social consciousness.
It is very much important that corporate, especially large ones, need to take cognizance of all these three factors, if the corporate stool is to remain steady and not fall or slip. While financial or economic considerations are important for any organization, it is also necessary to understand that this need not always be pursed at the risk of social or environmental considerations. As has been pointed out by the famous environmental writer and practitioner, Bob Willard, in his book, The Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line, 2003, the aspects that need to be considered for business sustainability could be seen in terms of the following aspects :
- Higher retention of top talents
- Increasing work force productivity
- Cutting down production expenses
- Curbing expenses relating to commercial sites
- Enhancing income generation/ market share
- Reducing risks/ easy finance (Anne).
According to Bob, the sustainability aspects of any concern could be greatly enhanced if it could be more conscious of its environmental settings and work in harmony with it. It is not only necessary that environmental harm should be prevented but also that the damages already done to it be repaired and restituted. This is of major concern in the case of large corporate like DuPont should show greater awareness and responsibility towards the preservation and conservation of environmental issues, like air, water, atmospheric preservation and forbearance from any kind of environmental degradation and protection of the delicate ecological balance.
While financial profiteering and large scale growth need be necessary, it is equally important that other considerations like environmental protection and the social responsibility of business need to be preserved and nurtured in order to sustain the business for a long time
It is necessary that corporate, especially environmentally conscious ones like DuPont need to consider the triple bottom line or 3 E’s and 3 P’s. In order to establish a correct rapport it is necessary to consider the 3 E’s and the 3P’s. The 3 e’s could be in terms of
Economy, Environment and Equity and the 3 p’s in terms of Profits, Planets and people. (Sharma).
Economic Leg Ofsustainability Stool.
Environmental Leg Ofsustainability Stool.
Sociological Leg of Sustainabilitys Tool.
It is thus seen that three legs of the stool are as depicted above need to have been adhered by DuPont with regard to its CFC programs in order that the true sustainability character of the enterprise would have been endeared.
However, it is important to understand that DuPont, in consonance with the best industry leadership and ethical practices had pioneered the Montreal Protocol which happened to be the first international environmental agreement of its kind anywhere in the world.
True to its leadership style, DuPont responded admirably to administrative regulations and withdrew the use of commercial CFC, when it was a $ 135 B industry in the US
(Backgrounder: DuPont and the CFC/Ozone Depletion Issue). DuPont’s commitment to the cause of environmental concern is best reflected in the fact that it had invested heavily in R&D to seek out alternatives for CFC and had since developed alternatives that are being widely used at the moment.
However, it is necessary that in the future, the impact of environmental and social constructs need to be ensured by DuPont to gain the maximum advantage of corporate citizenship committed to the cause of serving the international community through goods, services and utilities that are produced keeping the best global industry standards in environmental sustenance and preservation.
While it is necessary to maintain economic gains in a globally competitive market with shrinking margin and burgeoning costs, it is also imperative that corporate address the major issues confronting the community, environment and social settings in which they operate, in order that the true letter and spirit of sustainability is nourished and maintained in future. While companies vie with one another for profit building , it needs to also compete in providing the highest standards of safety and environmental security , keeping the ecological balance intact and conducting themselves as good corporate citizens would be behaving. This is essential not only for the corporate themselves but also necessary for the overall good of the nation and the world.
Therefore it is necessary that large conglomerates need to take cognizance of the larger holistic picture before embarking on ambitious, albeit environmentally unsafe production or business endeavors.
Works Cited
The State of New Zealand’s Environment: Chapter 5: The State of our Atmosphere. 2008. Web.
Risciotti, Cristina. Du Pont and the Ozone Layer Issue: Public Relations as a Source for Media Coverage. 1989. Web.
Anne, Papmehl. The Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line. All Business A D & B Company. CMA Management. 2003. Web.
Sharma, Subhash. Towards Holistic Performance Scorecard: A New Strategic Imperative. 2008. Web.
Backgrounder: DuPont and the CFC/Ozone Depletion Issue. Du Pont. 2007. Web.