Monsanto Social Responsibility

Monsanto’s is not listed among the Weakest Reputation corporations from the Harris Report from 2008 (Ferrell, Hartline, 2014). However, they are currently listed in 96th place out of 100 for 2015 results from the current Harris Report (The Harris Poll, 2016). Monsanto received a score of 60.43 which falls into the poor category range of 55-64. The company has extensive work to complete to recovery from past indiscretions—Agent Orange, bribery, toxic waste dumping and cover up, and the perception of greed over human decency (Adams, 2012). It is not surprising that Monsanto has a low score due to the many complications in its long corporate history, and legal issues. Typically, firms with poor reputations are companies that have been through

Developing open practices between the company and the farmer in order to produce more food and conserve more resources, as the CEO of Monsanto would say (Ferrell, Hartline, 2014). A trust between the farmers and the company is critical to change the perception of the company. Farmers do not need to feel threatened to use Monsanto’s product, and be held to “mafia” like standards or subjected to unnecessary fines (Ferrell, Hartline, 2014). Rather than looking to the foreign market as another source of income, the philanthropic side of Monsanto could use its resources in difficult climates where crops do not flourish.
Thirdly, Monsanto should nurture a relationship with environmentalists. Create a model to save the earth and to promote a positive impact on the environment, and with every negative impact the company causes, the company will commit to a project that will foster a green solution for the environment.
Faith in this company is low and it will take years to repair its reputation. Time will tell if rebranding will be necessary. Concentrating on strong leadership, customer focused, and target social responsible initiatives will be a