4.5 Review

Working to shape what society's expectations of us should be: Philip Morris' societal alignment strategy

期刊

TOBACCO CONTROL
卷 17, 期 6, 页码 391-398

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/tc.2008.026476

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute Fellowship [CA-113710-02, R01 CA120138]
  2. US/UK Fulbright Distinguished Scholar Award
  3. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [T32CA113710, R25CA113710, R01CA120138] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A key element of Philip Morris's (PM's) corporate social responsibility initiatives is societal alignment, defined as strategies and programs to meet society's expectations of a responsible tobacco company. This study explored the genesis and implementation of Philip Morris' (PM) societal alignment efforts. Methods: The study retrieved and analysed approximately 375 previously undisclosed PM documents now available electronically. Using an iterative process, the study categorised themes and prepared a case analysis. Results: Beginning in 1999, PM sought to become societally aligned by identifying expectations of a responsible tobacco company through public opinion research and developing and publicising programs to meet those expectations. Societal alignment was undertaken within the US and globally to ensure an environment favourable to PM's business objectives. Despite PM's claims to be changing, however, societal alignment in practice was highly selective. PM responded to public expectations largely by retooling existing positions and programs, while entirely ignoring other expectations that might have interfered with its business goals. It also appears that convincing employees of the value and authenticity of societal alignment was difficult. Conclusions: As implementation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control proceeds, tobacco control advocates should closely monitor development of such alignment initiatives and expose the motivations and contradictions they reveal.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据