Week 3 - Vermont Teddy Bear: 1, 2

Vermont Teddy Bear (VTB) did violate the requirements of corporate social responsibility as outlined by the four components of the pyramid of corporate social responsibility. VTB met the requirements of economic responsibilities (they were profitable) and legal responsibilities (they did not break the law). However, they may have violated the ethical responsibilities of doing what is right and avoiding harm. This is a really grey area. Who is the judge of what is right? Although there were some individuals and groups that protested the sale of the “Crazy for You” bear, there were also many consumers that purchased the product. If companies only sold products that nobody had a problem with, there would be no products to sell – there is at least one person out there that is offended by every product in existence. Where VTB missed the boat is in there failure to meet the philanthropic responsibilities of social responsibility. Although they decided that they would continue selling the “Crazy for You” bear, they missed the opportunity to placate many of their opponents by not making a contribution to a mental health group. The controversy was both negative and positive for the company and Robert. The product sold out and the media attention exposed the company to many new consumers or potential consumers. On the other hand, they may have lost some potential customers because of their own personal feelings regarding the “Crazy for You” bear. I believe the Robert showed herself to be a strong leader that would not buckle under outside pressure. However, her stance did cost her a position on a local hospital board.