Coca-Cola Company

The government charged the Coca-Cola Company with marketing and selling a beverage that was injurious to health. They charged the company with producing a beverage that produced serious mental and motor deficits due to the use of synthetic caffeine. They also claimed that Coca-Cola was misbranded because its name implied that the product contained coca, yet it did not contain the whole coca leaf (because the cocaine was removed) and the name constituted a false and misleading design. The government hoped to prove that Coca-Cola caused cognitive, sensory and motor deficits and that Coca-Cola was adulterated because it’s caffeine content was an added

Leadership must be doing something right if they have been around for over 100 years and able to compete with as much strong competition that exist these days. In order for Coca-Cola to continue to compete in the market, they have worked hard to educate and support

“Whether Coca-Cola can prevent the infringement of its trademark Coca-Cola and unfair competition with it in its business of

Coca-Cola is shifting its product strategy to develop healthy beverages. “Minnick’s ambitions, if they hold, would utterly redefine Coca-Cola’s image as a purveyor of sugar-laden junk that you should’ve give your kids” (Carvens & Piercy, 2009). Entering a healthy-beverage market segment can potentially improve as well as expand Coca-Cola image. The new market segment will reel in even more consumers for the company, only

In 2000, Coca-Cola falsified results during a marketing research of frozen Coke at several Burger King restaurants (Day, 2003). Employees of Coca-Cola engaged in this questionable conduct in the expectations of increasing business at Burger King and convincing them

In 1886, the Coca Cola Company was developed but it wasn't until 1898 that the fierce competitor Pepsi-Cola entered into the market. These 2 companies are the two major players that dominate the consumer beverage (soft-drink) industry. Coke and Pepsi have since been competing to rein the global market in consumer beverages. The market of drinks in the United States alone is valued at more than thirty million dollars annually. With the growth of these two companies, PepsiCo has developed and acquired additional products outside the scope of just the consumer beverage industry, these products have helped the company to increase their exposure and position in the global market. This has not been the case for the Coca Cola Company; they

From the late 1800s until today, the Coca-Cola’s brand has evolved into a top contender in the beverage industry, which ignited the “cola wars” with the company’s top competition PepsiCo. with Coca-Cola controlling 45 percent of the global soft drink market; Coca-Cola’s most famous brands include: Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite, Powerade, Dasani water and Fanta with Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite and Fanta being four of the top five leading soft drinks. At the peak of Coca-Cola’s reign, an estimated $1 billion of their products were consumed daily. In 2006, Coca-Cola lost it’s top position to PepsiCo. due to their competitors diverse strategy to include snack foods in their product line. As a result, Coca-Cola’s reputation was in jeopardy. Although Coca-Cola takes pride in its social responsibility by offering educational opportunities and learning tools to the youth and graduates, environmental conservation efforts and charitable donations for HIV/AIDS research, the company has encountered a stream of ethical dilemmas. Coca-Cola’s ethical dilemmas include: contaminated products, antitrust violations, racial discrimination suits, fraud accusations, manipulating marketing and financial statements, anti-union tactic allegations, ‘strong-arming’ distributors and channel surfing. This misconduct has severely affected Coca-Cola’s reputation with its shareholders. Although Coca-Cola has set a strong standard of accountability and is reinforcing the integrity that once fueled the company, their

Coca Cola’s first main weakness is that it is highly susceptible to any kind of negative publicity. Every kind of negative publicity can hurt the brand badly. Some years ago after traces of pesticides were found in the products of Coca Cola, it had hurt the brand really hard. Sales had dipped in various corners of the world apart from the criticism that flowed. Any such thing can hurt the popularity and sales of coca cola. However, Coca cola can overcome this weakness by being more transparent regarding the ingredients it uses in the production of its brands.

Coca-Cola is the result of a patent medicine formulated in a small southern pharmacy over a hundred years ago. It has grown into a multibillion dollar international company. It also owns one of the most valuable brands in the world. Their Coca-Cola banner has won the world’s top brand 13 times on brand c-consulting firm Interbrand’s annual list (Fraser, 2012). In addition to its main product, Coke, the company owns over 3500 beverages. One of its core competencies is brand building. They have built their brand to have respectability and dependability. Their brand and logo are recognized all around the globe. It has actually become a new known on almost all households worldwide (RNWILKIN, 2009).

Coca-Cola suffered a major crisis in June 1999 when children in Belgium became sick after consuming Coke products. The Coca-Cola Company was unable to handle this crisis adequately and because they were unprepared to handle this issue they lost consumer trust and much of the European market. Their slow response time gave people little hope that they were in control and taking care of the problem. The Belgium government had to step in and recall all Coke products, which eventually led to the Netherlands and Luxembourg following suit. If Coca-Cola would have had an effective crisis

The crisis that happened at Coca Cola was a very crucial incident. It affected issues such as brand and reputation, and the company has to take action so as not to ruin its image. Coca Cola is a company with a very strong brand name all over the world. An attack like this of the NGO can lead any company to problems. Although the Center for Science and Environment attacked the safety of Coca Cola India 's products, Coke was well within the Indian government 's legal limits for pesticide residue in beverages. The fact is that the country 's standards are weak, so the problem of Sanjiv Gupta and his team is how to rebuild trust. Furtherore, Gupta tries to find ways on how he could contribute on the creation of higher standards for food and

“A Coke is a Coke, and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same, and all the Cokes are good. Liz Taylor knows it, the President knows it, the bum knows it, and you know it."(Andy Warhol, 1975) Regardless of its corporate reputation, the organizational performance and its social responsibility of Coca-Cola makes it loved around the world. Ever since its creation in 1886 Coca-Cola has been a household brand known globally for generations of families. I have to mention, of all the cases researched this is my least favorite not only because of my childhood love for the product because the ethical issues in one way or another always manage to resolve themselves not before further tainting the reputation Coke worked so hard to obtain. Most times, whether an organization is innocent of an unethical act, it becomes secondary to the suspicion of the original act. Almost as if the court of public opinion has the power to ruin the reputation of an organization based on an unfounded accusation. In spite of my loyalty after having ready the case, I do believe Coca-Cola to be flawed. The contamination scare in Belgium is a great example of a public relations nightmare. The slightest hint of impurity should have pushed Coca Cola into crisis management mode but they were slow to react, citing it a minor issue (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, (2011). It was not until local officials

Despite being a billion dollar 125 year company that is a household name around the world, Coca-Cola has had to cope with unexpected situations and variation of positioning based upon the main competitions movements, Pepsi. According to Trout and Reis, (2001, p. 10) “Truth is irrelevant. What matters are the perceptions that exist in the mind.” This is a thinking process called outside-in

Whether or not Coca-Cola should support bottlers accused of human rights violations is a tricky question. On one hand, there is a definite history of horrific crimes taking place in some of the plants with which they are affiliated. The findings which were determined by the Cal-Safety Workplace Assessment Colombia (CSCC), was quite telling, since the workers did not appear to be fearful in any way. The CSCC also reported that they did have a few serious concerns. If these concerns do not correlate with human rights violations or any more critical violations, then Coca-Cola should continue to support the bottlers. However, the CSCC was criticized for its prior history of

Coca-Cola is a big recognized brand that produces many products than just soda drinks. With all the money and brand recognition the company possesses, there are possibilities for the company to past the scandals and keep up in the business market, like we have discovered the company has invested money to cover illicit activities. However, it is very important for the company to act ethically and respond to the scandals that the company has been accused. If Coca-Cola responds morally correct, it will shows the customers that the company cares about social responsibility, but if the company does not act fast and ethically, it exists the possibilities that the company’s sales keep declining.