What role should an organization's control system play in situations like these? Did Bausch & Lomb do enough? Could its control sys- tem have been more effective? How? Which type of control-feedforward, concurrent, or feedback-do you think would be most important in this type of situation? Explain your choice. How might immediate corrective action have been used in this situation? How about basic corrective action? What role would information controls play in this sit- uation? Financial controls? Customer interactions? 6. What could other organizations learn from this situation?
1. Logically answering Case Study Questions
(Case study)
Blurred Vision It's unrealistic to think that all products can be guaranteed 100 percent safe at all times in all places for all people. But as consumers we'd like to believe that manufacturers are doing whatever they can to ensure that products are as safe as possible... especially when it comes to prod- ucts used on or in our bodies that have the potential to do serious harm or damage. And more importantly, we'd like to believe that if manufacturers discovered some- thing potentially wrong with one of their products, that they would take immediate action to correct it. Executives at Bausch & Lomb found themselves dealing with such a scenario as problems with one of its most popular and Ilucrative products-a contact lens cleaner, ReNu With MoistureLoc-became more evident.
Doctors in Hong Kong first started noticing cases of a troubling eye infection Fusarium keratitis in July of 2005, but were not able to make the connection specifi- cally to Bausch & Lomb's product. Yet, in February of 2006, the company agreed to stop selling that lens cleaner in Hong Kong and Singapore. By March 2006, more than 100 people in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States had developed eye infections, "with some of the worst cases requiring cornea transplants," and the connection to the ReNu product was pretty evi- dent. Health officials in Singapore said "they had estab- lished a strong statistical connection between Bausch & Lomb's ReNu With MoistureLoc cleaner and Fusarium eye fungus infections." But it wasn't until April 13, 2006, after some U.S. retailers independently began removing the product from shelves, that Bausch & Lomb took its first public action-a voluntary market withdrawal- asking retailers to remove the ReNu product from their shelves temporarily until it could further investigate the reports of fungal keratitis infections among contact lens wearers. In open ads in USA Today and regional news- papers, the company also recommended that consumers switch to another lens care solution product. Company CEO Ron Zerrella said, "For more than 150 years, Bausch & Lomb's mission has been to enhance your vision. We find ourselves in a position where the safety of one of our products manufactured at our United States plant is in question. We've done a series of exhaustive tests on the product, and a thorough inspection of the plant, and nothing has yet been found to show that ReNu With MoistureLoc contributed to these infections in any way. However, in the cases of infections reviewed to date, the majority of patients reported using ReNu With MoistureLoc manufactured at our U.S. factory. Bausch & Lomb's first priority is the health and safety of con- sumers. If there is a problem with our product, we'll find it and we'll fix it." On May 15, 2006, the company explained that it had "finally, after months of sleuthing, found a link between the product and a potentially blinding eye infection." In a release by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Bausch & Lomb proposed that "unique characteristics of the formulation of the ReNu With MoistureLoc product in certain unusual circumstances can increase the risk of Fusarium infection. Based on this scientific data, Bausch & Lomb has decided to perma- nently remove the ReNu With MoistureLoc product worldwide." Although the company said it moved as "rapidly as possible to understand and respond to its product's role in the outbreak," others say it did not move fast enough to avert a crisis.
- What role should an organization's
control system play in situations like these? - Did Bausch & Lomb do enough? Could its control sys- tem have been more effective? How?
- Which type of control-feedforward, concurrent, or feedback-do you think would be most important in this type of situation? Explain your choice.
- How might immediate corrective action have been used in this situation? How about basic corrective action?
- What role would information controls play in this sit- uation? Financial controls? Customer interactions? 6. What could other organizations learn from this situation?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 7 steps
