week 3 compliance

docx

School

Northeastern University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

6000

Subject

Information Systems

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by DeaconTeam12693

Report
The case study of Johnson & Johnson and talcum powder centres around allegations of noncompliance with safety regulations and stresses about the potential health dangers associated with its talc-based goods. Johnson & Johnson, an internationally recognized pharmaceutical and consumer goods corporation, was subjected to legal action and public scrutiny over the safety of their talcum powder products, including Baby Powder. The issue erupted in light of allegations that Johnson & Johnson's talcum powder products contained asbestos, a known carcinogen, and that long-term use could increase the risk of ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. Plaintiffs in several instances claimed that the firm was aware of these risks but failed to appropriately warn consumers or recall the products in question. The case drew a lot of attention because of its possible influence on public health and the reputation of the pharmaceutical sector. Johnson & Johnson insisted that its talcum powder products were asbestos-free and safe, citing decades of testing and regulatory approvals. Several lawsuits, however, resulted in large settlements and damage awards against the corporation. In the pharmaceutical and consumer goods businesses, the Johnson & Johnson talcum powder case emphasizes the necessity of rigorous safety testing, open communication with consumers, and regulatory compliance. (Wood, n.d.) It also emphasizes the legal and financial consequences of charges of noncompliance with safety standards and openness, which can harm both corporate reputation and consumer trust. This case demonstrates the complicated issues that businesses confront in assuring the safety and integrity of their products while navigating changing regulatory landscapes and consumer expectations. Coming to the Do’s and Don’ts of compliance in this case study, a lot could be done to prevent this from happening and damaging the reputation of one of the most well known multinational pharmaceutical and consumer goods company and costing them millions of dollars in damages and compensation. Here are some: Do’s of Compliance: Stringent Product Testing: An essential compliance practice is rigorous and ongoing product testing. Companies must test raw materials and final products on a regular basis to discover potential contaminants or deviations from quality requirements. Many problems may have been averted if Johnson & Johnson had continuously applied extensive quality control techniques for its talcum powder products. Transparency in Communication: Transparency is essential in compliance efforts. Transparent communication is a crucial compliance practice in the Johnson & Johnson case. When concerns or possible dangers occur, businesses must swiftly notify the public, regulators, and stakeholders. Even in challenging situations, clear and honest communication, combined with corrective actions, can help retain confidence. Proactive Regulatory Compliance: Companies must remain vigilant in meeting regulatory standards. One of the key takeaways from this case is the value of proactive regulatory compliance. It is critical to keep up with changing legislation and
invest in comprehensive compliance programs. Johnson & Johnson was sued for suspected violations of product safety rules, underscoring the importance of proactive compliance activities. Don’ts of compliance: Downplaying Risks: One important compliance "don't" is to minimize or ignore potential risks linked with products or processes. In the Johnson & Johnson case, the business was chastised for failing to act quickly when evidence of asbestos contamination arose. Underestimating risks can have serious legal and reputational consequences.(Rabin & Hsu, 2018) Lack of Accountability: Businesses should avoid a lack of accountability in compliance matters. A crucial compliance "don't" in the case study is neglecting to accept responsibility for potential compliance failings. It is critical to identify and hold accountable relevant parties within the organization for compliance supervision and corrective measures. Neglecting Product Lifecycle Monitoring: Another bad compliance practice emphasized by this instance is neglecting product lifecycle monitoring. Johnson & Johnson was accused of knowing about possible asbestos pollution for decades but failing to take sufficient precautions. Companies should not disregard continued product monitoring throughout their lifecycle, including post-market surveillance and risk assessments.(Hurst et al., n.d.) In conclusion, the Johnson & Johnson talcum powder case serves as a stark reminder to businesses of the necessity of compliance. Companies can avoid possible compliance problems by prioritizing strict product testing, open communication, and proactive regulatory compliance. Downplaying risks, failing to hold people accountable, and failing to manage product lifecycles, on the other hand, can have serious implications. Businesses should take these lessons very seriously in order to retain their legal and ethical integrity and defend their reputation. This case demonstrates that compliance is more than just a checklist; it is an ongoing commitment to safety, transparency, and regulatory obedience. REFERENCES: Hurst, B., Blood, T. G., Hurst, L. E., Ii, T. J. O., & Roach, P. M. (n.d.). BLOOD HURST & O’REARDON, LLP . 13 . Maloney, C. B., Norton, E. H., Gosar, P. A., Carolina, N., Massie, T., Carolina, N., Hice, J. B., Grothman, G., Comer, J., Cloud, M., Gibbs, B., Carolina, S., Higgins, C., Roy, C., Miller, C. D., Virginia, W., Green, M. E., Armstrong, K., & Steube, W. G. (n.d.). COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM .
Rabin, R. C., & Hsu, T. (2018, December 15). Johnson & Johnson Feared Baby Powder’s Possible Asbestos Link for Years. The New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/business/baby-powder-asbestos-johnson- johnson.html Wood, M. (n.d.). Facing thousands of lawsuits alleging that its talc caused cancer, J&J insists on the safety and purity of its iconic product. But internal documents examined by Reuters show that the company’s powder was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos and that J&J kept that information from regulators and the public.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help