Arla Foods Case
a. Religious beliefs/considerations and how field them in the business world
Often companies will not try to actively involve their own politics with religion. Doing so can create a very murky environment, where businesses can operate better with black and white matters that minimize ambiguity. Religion is a volatile area that can serve to create discord and animosity in relations. Companies must find a way to effectively maneuver their business in a way that considers religion and accounts for it, so they can address it when need arises. It is not about catering to every possible instance of every possible religion, it is more about being able to foresee these encounters of religion and business, and minimize collateral damage from them while maximizing returns.
b. The loss of business due to outside forces and collateral damage; jobs lost, capital lost, and how to return to market norms after the setback
The Middle East began boycotting goods that were Danish, which heavily impacted the company, as it was Arla’s second biggest market. This type of turmoil is very hard for a company to navigate, as it is not central to the company, rather it is a problem that operates on a much larger scale. Now the company has to deal with many personal negative effects, with very little personal control. This is a very unfortunate circumstance, however, a business has to try its best to regulate everything that is within its power and try to work with the stakeholders to regain losses and minimize damage.
c. Whether or not the Danish government should apologize.
As Denmark is a democracy, and a poll was taken on the matter with 79% support of the non-apology, it would seem prudent to not deviate from ideals and keep a finger on the pulse of the people. While international relations are important, the decision made from the government did not affect them as much as Arla proved to be affected, as less than 1% of exports from Denmark went to these...