Responses
Here are 4 discussion posts made by students needing responses. Must be APA format, 12 pt font, intext citation, 1 legitimate, verifiable source per response, responses must be 150+ words answered thourghly. I need at least one done every night by 10pm, first one due by tomorrow, Thursday November 14,2019 @ 10 pm and so on until the last one Sunday @ 10 pm. This is the discussion about Pacific Palm Oil.

Once you have completed your initial post, read those of your classmates and give them constructive feedback as to whether they have clearly defined the decision statement as delineated in the class materials. Be sure that the feedback is constructive and that you are actually brainstorming with them to come up with valid arguments on why the final decision statement (the one that was provided to you) is the best one for PPO. Your job is to argue the logic presented in the content and support (facts from case study or citations) provided in the posts.

In responding to CAPO’s attacks, how will PPO keep their customers and continue to make money?

#1

Christopher Hughes

Some triggers would be that if they expand that customers will possibly boycott them and with protest it could hurt PPO even more finically. The opportunity for PPO to push for a decision would be that they would be able to expand quickly and gain more capital. He wants to achieve a goal that makes the activist happy and he still would be able expand without any problems. Also this way he could possibly manage to get that government certification.

Statement 1: We will have to expand into the virgin rainforest, because our other plantations will not be able to keep up with the huge demand that we have. We’re going to try to avoid killing or harming any Orangutans in the process and will try to work with some of the activist groups to relocate them. Many still will not happy with our decision, but at the end of the day it is a business decision that affects all our customers as well.

Statement 2: We will replant some of our plantations, so there is not further need for us to expand into the virgin rainforest. This will hurt us in the short term, but will pay of in the long run, because that way we can rotate plantations growth of palm oil. This will cut us some slack on the protest groups and avoid possible boycotts we might run into. The loss of some of our contracted customers could threaten us, but with the loss of production it would help reach our demand goals. And within just a view years we would be able to have three plantations up and running at full production, which at that time we could consider expanding with the extra capital we would make. That extra capital might help us to buy up some of the smaller plantations, so we would not have to expand into the rainforest.

#2

Ronday Wilson The major trigger that is pushing Pacific Palm Oil (PPO) to make a decision is time. They understand that the oldest factory is coming to the end of its production cycle and will need to pass through a phase of replanting trees. Moreover, the second factory is following closely behind it in its need to end its production cycle. The problem that this causes is that all three plants contribute to PPO’s level of production and even having one factory absent will bring hardship to the company. The goal of the production plantation manager wants the decision to achieve would be to find a way to somehow keep their customer contracts whilst addressing their declining yields. This decision will focus on the future. This decision is about making strategic decision. “Making strategic decision is choosing the right road to run on” (Judd, 2013). The manager has to choose a direction to go in that will address this issue. Additionally, PPO needs to address the threat of Consumers Against Palm Oil (CAPO). If their decision does not address both the customer contracts and the CAPO then may have to address a separate issue for CAPO as this is a present threat. This present problem refers to managing operations. “Managing operations is running well on the chosen road.” (Judd, 2013). The protest have begun so PPO will have to figure out how to appease them while addressing the future problem too. Possible decision statement #1: The company will expand into another country. It will take time to choose another country, plant the trees and get a yield. Currently all three factories are producing. This is the perfect time to build a new factory in another county as the oldest factory will be out of commission in a few years. Possible decision statement #2: Palm oil will be imported from other countries. This would give the plantations time to replant a new crop, bring the destruction of the current rain forest to a halt, which would make both the orangutans and CAPO happy. “But to produce palm oil in large enough quantities to meet growing demand, farmers across Southeast Asia have been clearing huge swaths of biodiversity-rich tropical rain forest to make room for massive palm plantations” (Miniscalco, 2008, para. 2). Lastly, it would give the new outsourced location time to start producing. Importing may be expensive but the cost may be offset by the fact that PPO won’t have to pay for labor or taxes for the shutdown factory. The decision statement “In responding to CAPO’s attacks, how will PPO keep their customers and continue to make money?” focuses on the two main concerns of the company which are retaining customers and continuing to make money. This decision statement is valid as it lets you know that the company is being proactive and not reactive. Reactive decisions are made after an event has taken place. “Decisions are declared by human beings. Sometimes they arise when we have what philosophers call a break in our existence—some change in our circumstances— that impels us to declare a decision. We can consider these decisions as reactive to the change” (Howard & Abbas, 2015, p. 4, para. 6). This decision statement keeps the primary goals (customers and money) while ignoring the other such as the orangutans, deforestation and CAPO. My decisions are incorrect as they did the opposite.

Reference Howard, R. A. & Abbas, A. E. (2015, January 21). Foundations of Decision Analysis. Retrieved from http://create.usc.edu/sites/default/files/publications/m01howa624601sec01.pdf Judd, B. [Strategic Decisions Group] (2013, November 30). Fundamentals of Decision Quality. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFV-lzIqfRA Miniscalco, E. (2008, December 11). Is Harvesting Palm Oil Destroying the Rainforests? Retrieved https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/harvesting-palm-oil-and-rainforests/

#3

Rachylle McGee

Pacific Palm Oil (PPO) is consumed by time in making a decision on what to do next and needs to work on making the customers happy. Pacific Palm Oil (PPO) is at the end of their production cycle for the trees and will need to replant to start the cycle over again. Pacific Palm Oil (PPO)is having issues with customers being unhappy by having protest and boycotting on the ecosystem and wild life being damaged by palm oil companies. Pacific Palm Oil (PPO) is wanting to expand their business and gain capital as well. The production plant manager wants to increase sales, while also improving sales and the increasing the yields of palm oil. The plant manager will create strategies that will focus on the future of the palm oil company to improve the amount of palm oil and to increase ways to improve the way they retrieve palm oil to protect the environment. By improving the ways company gets palm oil, the company will also make the environment better and make the consumers happier by making big changes. The Pacific Palm Oil company needs to correct the issue of the threats of consumers against the way palm oil is manufactured, gathered and made in the production factory. The company does not a decrease in sales due to customers being unhappy with the company. The (PPO) company will have to deal with the after math of more threats and boycotting rallies against the company, which will make it harder for the company to make sales. The consumers are already starting to hold protest against the company and this creates issues for the company and the management team, trying to handle the issue at hand.

Statement 1: The possible decision for the (PPO) company will be to move to a new location. Which will create better yields for the company and protect the wild life such as, the orangutans. The factory location will move to an uninhabited location, such as a large island in the Philippines with no wild life animals. The carbon process for gathering the oil, will be easily released into the air, without doing much damn to humans and animals. By moving the company to an island, it will make it harder for consumers to protest. The move of the company will increase the amount of funds for the company and decrease the number of unhappy consumers.

Statement 2: The next possible decision that the (PPO) company can make is to stop production for a few years, so the soil can route its fields to gain nutrients in the soil. By doing this the company will be able to get a better crop the next time around and so the wild life animals can increase in number. The (PPO) can gather resources from other countries for a cheaper whole sale price to keep their consumer base clients. (PPO) company can gather palm oil in China, other Asian counties and the south African. This will help with the ecosystem. By gathering palm oil from other countries will increase the location of sales in foreign countries. And decrease the number of people against the (PPO) company. There will be some cheap resources depending on what countries the (PPO) decides to go to. The wages of workers will also decrease depending on where the new factory will be located. Such as Philippines, the wages will be low and there is not much wild life. When a few years have passed, the company will be able to reopen their old locations to make palm oil, when the environment is better and the soil is ready to plant.

Last June Billy Kayong, was killed as an activist going against a Malaysian palm-oil company (Zuckerman, C., 2019). The company does not need to go this far, to save their company. It is the managements job to create new ways of production. Bill Kayong was helping locals to reclaim land that the government took, and was using that land to make more money from palm oil (Zuckerman, C., 2019)..

References:

Zuckerman, J. C. (2017, June 19). The Violent Costs of the Global Palm-Oil Boom. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-violent-costs-of-the-global-palm-oil-boom.

#4

Donovan Sanchez

The main trigger that PPO is facing is that they have become a target of the Consumer Against Palm Oil (CAPO). CAPO has a mission to publicly protest and picket the business at its sites. The group also plans to boycott the brands that use palm oil in their production. This issue has prompted some of PPO’s big American customers to inquire about the problem. They have also hinted to PPO that they may have to seek out a sustainable palm oil producer if the problem is not addressed.

The production managers decision should identify the specific goals for PPO’s business. This goal is to continue to be profitable while addressing the concerns of their American customers, and the Consumers Against Palm Oil attacks.

Possible Decision Statement #1. Pacific Palm Oil will continue to prosper as a palm oil producing company by addressing the issue of sustainability. The company’s oldest plantation is coming to an end and can be relocated to larger fertile land when replanting becomes a factor. Relocating one of our sites can become a win in the issue of the problems we face from Consumers Against Palm Oil. This process may take some time and revenue, but will ultimately please the company’s bottom line. It will also satisfy our American customers and the activists groups targeting PPO, while growing the businesses future production.

Possible Decision Statement #2. Pacific Palm Oil will be addressing the issues they face from Consumers Against Palm Oil by addressing the main problems that cause their crops to underproduce. PPO will enlist a third-party organization to process the quality of our young plants. This will help the company raise revenue while currently holding our lands and producing more oil without expanding its plantations. This action will take the pressure off of deforestation and at the same time pleasing our American customers and the CAPO organization.

Examine the following decision statement, which is the one you will be using for the MDQ model and case study:

In responding to CAPO’s attacks, how will PPO keep their customers and continue to make money?

This statement provides a basic premise of the issue that the company faces. This decision statement is put in the form of a question. It does not provide an explanation nor a solution of the decision that is to be made.