BUSINESS ETHICS

CASE STUDY OF H.B. FULLER

H.B. Fuller and the Street Children of Central America

Submitting Date: 09th April 9, 2008

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Mr. Mohsin Rauf Khawaja Naveed Haider
073605-085
 CASE STUDY OF H.B. FULLER
H.B. Fuller and the Street Children of Central America

Question No 1:
Is H.B.Fuller responsible for the addiction of street
children to its Resistol products? Do you agree or disagree
with the statement that the social conditions in Honduras
and Guatemala are ultimately responsible for misuse of
H.B. Fuller products and that neither the product nor the
company is to blame? Do you agree or disagree that a
parent company is not responsible for the activities of its
subsidiaries? Explain your answers full.

a) I don’t think that H.B.Fuller is responsible. Because the thing

is that they’re just doing their business and nothing else. It’s
their right to do whatever business they want. It is just like that
when you go to the well, if the dog fell into the well so what we
can do then? The company is just concerned with the business of
producing glue. To maintain the status of the company, they
need to use best chemicals out of best. It is the duty of the
company to maintain the quality. If there isn’t any substitute of
that glue then they’re helpless. They can’t hang their company.

b) If we talk about the children who were affected by the habit of

sniffing the glue, children can understand what is right and what
is wrong if they’re the part of the company. If they’re sniffing the
glue, it is up to them. Company never said about that. To sniff
the glue is their action why the company should be blame?

c) Of course! I’m agreeing with the statement that H.B.Fuller is

not responsible for the activities of its subsidiary. To let the
children know about the duties and precaution is the
responsibility of the company. If the children are habitual of this
thing, then I just want to say that it’s very hard to get rid of any
type addiction. One more thing that I want to discuss is that
when I’m drinker then what’s the problem with you? I know
about the side effects of this thing. So in this case, company is
parent it is right but they’re not taking work from the children for
the sake of Allah. Company is paying for what they are doing for
the business.

Question No 2:
In your judgment did H.B.Fuller conduct itself in a morally
appropriate manner? Explain your answer.

In my point of view, It’s I think a good step which the company

taken that they stopped selling of that glue in small jars. If the
glue is available in small jars, children have the maximum chance
to buy that glue because it is affordable for them. When the
company is selling that glue in large size of containers, it
becomes much easier to protect the children from using the glue.
Because large size of containers must not be in reach of children.
We’ll not go for utilitarianism because life is the only thing which
is priceless. Company should care about the health of children.

They did a good job but it costs the company very much. After all
they are running their business in a very large scale having
revenue more than $1 Billion (1995). They have found the safe
way to protect themselves from winding up the company.

Question No 3:
What, if anything, should the company have done that it
did not do?

After considering the whole case, we have got something which

is not done by the company but the company should do.

The company should advice the children about the use of this
glue and also aware the government about this product. I think,
after advising the children there might be less chances of
spreading disease. Children could be protected from the harmful
outcomes.

There are some more points which should be taken into the
account by the company:
• Company should mention the precautions on their product
about the usage of the product.
• Company should start the campaign regarding the usage of
the product.
• Company should advice the children time to time about the
usage and drawbacks of the product.