The post has addressed the three questions provided concerning an intellectual property issue. These questions are of great importance because they captures the contemporary issues that occur within the society in the field of business. It is apparent that a for-profit corporations may operate with the main intention of making money, but they also invest in their future by becoming aware of their consumer’s needs (Homburg, Jozić & Kuehnl, 2017). In addition, it is expected that corporations making life-saving products should put the needs of the customers before their own needs. However, this is not always the case because most business operates without little consideration to the customers.
In regards to balancing business and consumer needs, I agree with you that, in as much as a for-profit corporation are interested in making a profit, it can be impossible for these organizations to succeed without customer involvement. It is true that both Apple and Samsung have relating to intellectual property patency which hinders other business which could want to gain entry. However, I did not see the case study explanation relate to how a business can balance its needs with the customer needs. I think it would be important to mention something about the balancing act which involves weighing customer’s ideals with business realities to identify and implement solutions (Kubasek et al., 2016). For instance, in this case, both corporations; Apple and Samsung should go to the field and find out what the customers’ needs and relate the findings to their existing realities.
In relations to the question, whether the corporations that produces life-saving products should have greater responsibility for their customers than themselves, it was important to mention of a case study. I like the case study used in the post about Epi-Pen because it is a reflection of what is happening in the society. That said, I confer with you on how you have explained the ideal situation or a reflection in the society. However, it would be important in this question to, first of all, to accept that this kind of corporations should have greater responsibility for their customers compared to their stakeholders and then offer an explanation. It is vital for these corporations to focus more on the needs of the customers because of the nature of the products they offer (Homburg, Jozić & Kuehnl, 2017). For instance, when the prices of these products are high, many people will not be able to afford them; hence it can worsen the situation of customers.
In regards to the use of Biblical point of view, the key issues involving these questions are addressed effectively. For instance, the Bible verse provided in the post; Philippians 2: 4 says “Do not look out for your interest, but also the interest of others. Through this, owners of companies should understand that it is not always about themselves, but also other people’s interest as well. As stated in the post, “if I owned a business that had a product that saves lives, I would make it my responsibility that these customers were my number one priority” captures a key factor in the delivery of the question. As opposed to what Epi-Pen mentioned in the case study did, it would be important for the organization to set reasonable prices that can be afforded by most people in the society. It is apparent that these products are vital to humans and are meant to assist them when they have related complications (Kennedy, Welch & Monshipouri, 2017). Therefore, setting a good price for the customers shows that the organization has a greater responsibility for their customers compared to stakeholders.
Homburg, C., Jozić, D., & Kuehnl, C. (2017). Customer experience management: toward implementing an evolving marketing concept. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(3), 377-401.
Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Dhooge, L. J., Herron, D. J., & Barkacs, L. L. (2016). Dynamic Business Law: The Essentials. McGraw-Hill Education.
Kennedy, E. T., Welch, C. E., & Monshipouri, M. (2017). Multinational corporations and the ethics of global responsibility: Problems and possibilities. In Human Rights and Corporations (pp. 123-147). Routledge.