1. Class, if you are going to create an ethics training program for your company where one does not exist at the present time (or it is simply poorly executed), the first thing a company needs is commitment from top management.
Without that senior management commitment, which also means they need to have been "walking the walk," it become "training for activity" and not "training for results."
Next, we need something in writing -- a corporate "code of ethics," as it were. Developed by the HR organization, the "Code of Ethics" is a written treatise of how the company wishes its employees to approach business from an ethical perspective. A well written "Code of Ethics" is strongly supported by senior management and is reinforced throughout the year by management at all levels.
It's more than just handing out a Code of Ethics pamphlet, though. There must be training. The training should include senior management who clearly reinforce the "here's how we will do business above board at all times" message at the VERY beginning of the training by being present to share THAT message.
Training should include "what if...?" or "What would you do...?" scenarios/role plays that apply to different employees, depending on what their role is in the company. Testing (e.g., a 92% passing grade at a minimum) should be employed to ensure application and comprehension. Finally, management should continue to reinforce the importance of ethics throughout the year, along with an annual 'revisitation'.
Some companies may think that this isn't unnecessary. They could be right... but once the cow is out of the barnyard, that is NOT the time to close the gate. Companies would be wise to embrace the old adage, "A wise person learns from others' mistakes; a fool learns by their own." We too often see companies SPRING INTO ACTION after the cow is out of the barnyard. The companies do "spin control" with statement such as, "XYZ Company is taking steps to ensure that nothing like this will happen again." Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight! Why didn't they do this before the cow got out out the barnyard? The cost to do this, i.e., money, is usually the culprit. Secondarily, this is followed by the worn phrase, "We hire good people. They wouldn't do anything like that."
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight! If they had been good people in the first place, one could argue that they wouldn't have acted unethically.
Sometimes my adult learners tell me that when they go to HR and ask for a copy of the company's Code of Ethics that they are asked, "Why do you need a copy of THAT?" HR sometimes springs to the defensive... or they want to know "what do you plan do to with it?"
Most companies don't go to the through level of detail that I have suggested above! Class, does yours? How does your company approach ethics training for those in the role of marketing? Anything in writing?
2. As usual, your instructor is treated to a good plethora of postings early on in the week - ten of them!
Allow me to compliment and complement what you shared with a few additional perspectives. To sum up what you have said and ADD to it, I concur that "a company should do no harm". This is where a company Code of Ethics should help to communicate this critical message.
Your instructor would submit that the ultimate responsibility for ensuring an ethical environment and understanding begins at the very top of the company organization. Too many companies, however, give ethics "lip service".
There's that matter of a written Code of Ethics that is made available to all. Some companies have that "Code of Ethics"... others don't have one... and others have one, but it is all fluff and words. Again, I call it "lip service."
What happens at the company may also be interesting. To wit, take a look at what happens at YOUR company. Which of the following best describes what happens at YOUR place of employment to new employees when it comes to YOUR company's practices that trumpet the importance of ethical business practices? What was your experience when you arrived were you to select one of the three below?
a) Those who join the company receive a thorough indoctrination on ethics and how it applies to the company. You receive a "Code of Ethics" booklet. You are actually TESTED on your application of the "Code of Ethics" to that which you do professionally. The company reinforces the message, as does your manager. Each year, you undergo "refresher" training and testing. Senior management makes it very clear that being "above board" is the only acceptable way to go.
b) You are handed a "Code of Ethics" (or you are not handed it, as one does not exist). If the former, you are asked to sign that you have "read" it and "understand" it.
c) A mixture of each.
What has been your experience at YOUR place of employment? How effectively do you feel that YOUR company makes a STRONG, CONCERTED effort to reinforce ethics into the company culture and, especially, relative to the company's MARKETING efforts?
3. Some things to consider, keeping in mind that you want to LIMIT your financial expenditures until you KNOW that you have a winning product that is selling like hotcakes in India.
When you look at direct investment or a joint venture, this will cost money. At this point, you don't know if the product will be successful. Thus, we need to consider other lower-cost alternatives with less risk. I think to have the cereal manufactured in India make sense instead of importing it into India from Battle Creek, Michigan. The cereal is light, but the box takes a lot of space were you to transport it by ship. The least expensive way to get the product to India would be by ship... but it would take a long time.
Now, the question -- would it not make sense to have a food broker in India make Kellogg's cereals for Kellogg's instead of Kellogg's building their own manufacturing facility, which is what I think Rudy suggested? What do you think? What would be the benefit of doing this?