Regulations

Sustainability with a LUS(H)cious Twist

Posted on by spr1324mstapleton

Lush logo

This generation continuously asks questions. Some of the major one’s that companies are asking revolve around sustainability. How can we become sustainable? How do we incorporate sustainability into what our company stands for? The company Lush Cosmetics has found a way to answer those questions in a very luscious manner. Lush is a company based in the UK that creates organic soaps and other body products to free consumers from chemicals typically used in such products. This company prides itself on finding ways to keep the world a healthier place. Therefore, Lush has decided to incorporate ‘CloudApps’ into their management strategy.

CloudApps is a multi-award winning sustainability program that helps companies monitor their carbon footprints. This software also covers performance management and reporting, energy management, and employee engagement along with the carbon footprint management. This system is very intriguing because it’s not only incorporating the sustainability factor for energy and waste, but it is also helping to create a sustainable and resourceful work force throughout the international company.

lush youtube backgroundBy introducing this new operational infrastructure of the company, Lush has been able to get creative in being resourceful in the companies shipping process. All of Lush’smanufacturing factories are over in Europe. This would essentially mean that shipment is not cheap and very wasteful. Instead of allowing this waste to be created, Lush took it upon them selves to find cheaper and lighter ways to fly products overseas. Most of their soaps aren’t individually packaged allowing them to ship more for a lower cost. This reduces the use of extra waste and in my opinion is the best way to ship a fairly durable mass quantity of product.

Not only has this system helped create a more resourceful company, it has also tied recycling into the companies outlook. Since recycling begins at the design, the company has invited customers to return the empty containers that are left over so that they can recycle them internally and be put towards a new container. The company even reaches out as far as asking for all of their customers empty bottle tops so that they can be melted down into a new container as well. I feel that Lush is doing a sensational job with this. They have cut down on packaging by 62% just by taking advantage of recycling!

Monitoring the carbon and operational infrastructures of the company has also influenced regulations and reputation for the company. Pressures on employees to recycle and think resourceful have made an even bigger impact on what the company can give back lush_cosmetic_product_shot1.28sweui6r78kcc804wgsk0gsg.5r15frdicg4kos40gwk400wsw.thto the environment. The company uses the CloudApps to decide what employees get specific bonuses based on how much they are recycle and energy consumption. It is shocking how one little change can help a company produce a number of healthier environments. They have shaped the work environment of the company as well as taken ethical actions in producing a healthier global environment.

Do you think that this approach to their staff will back fire one day? Is the need to monitor and reward the future of management? In comparison to “The Skies TheLimit” spaghetti and marshmallow project, do you think that if we (students) would perform differently if were told about a reward for the highest and most stable tower? How does this act sustainability take part in a better future for other companies?

 

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/04/20/lush-cosmetics-taps-the-cloud-to-track-its-carbon-footprint/

http://www.cloudapps.com/product-overview/

Drug Dealers Beware!

Posted on by f1213spalreddy

 

How can improved quality control and diminishing quality control both work to save lives?

 

In the world of quality assurance, it is a rare thing to talk about quality within the public sector.  The public assumes that quality exists but nothing is ever thought of in regards to the measures are needed to make sure things are done correctly.  While reading this you will find two sides of the FDA.  One side of the FDA ensures the safety of people through increased quality control measures.  The other side of the FDA is hoping to remove some quality control measures in hopes of saving lives.

 

The FDA has begun rigorous efforts to take counterfeit and harmful drugs off of the internet.  http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-fda-baddrugs-idUSBRE8930SN20121004

 

In a time of rising health care costs and pricey prescriptions, consumers have looked to various other sources to save money.  A great source to purchase prescription medication is online.  However, many of these online retailers are distributing “counterfeit and illegal” medicine.   The FDA has joined forces with international regulatory and law enforcement agencies in an effort to take some of these dangerous drugs off the market.    18,000 online pharmacies have been shut down in the matter of just one week starting September 25th.    This is essentially a form of quality checking within the public sector.  The FDA is hoping to make sure that the medicines available to the public have gone through the testing process.  All of these regulatory agencies are working towards a pharmaceutical industry with high standards of quality.

 

In contrast, the FDA is also working to remove some of the quality processes associated with the drug approval process.  This comes mainly from a Republican push hoping to remove regulations across the board.  These deregulations are not meant to send harmful drugs out on the market prematurely.  This measure is hoping to assist immediately ill individuals that cannot wait through the testing process.  The FDA has been doing this since the 1990’s.  Currently patients within this characterization include aids and cancer patients.  However, the FDA is hoping to include various other threatening diseases/conditions to this “accelerated approval” process.  “Of 35 medicines termed innovative by the FDA and approved during fiscal 2011, 16 have some sort of shortened review or expedited approval” (Burton 2012).  The key is that people with “life threatening” conditions are more willing to try riskier drugs.  These people do not have the luxury of time to wait through the quality assurance process.

 

The point of this shows how quality assurance is paramount in some regards and in other circumstances it serves as handcuffs for progress.  The latter tends to be rare but it does point out that too many regulations have harmful effects.  We can clearly relate this to the upcoming elections as republicans and democrats battle over the topic of increased regulations.  There are clear positives for both sides.  Too many regulations impede progress and at times create a feeling of too much governmental control.  Not enough regulations also have catastrophic results.  Going back to the initial topic, if the FDA did not thoroughly check items that came through their department, people’s lives would be in danger.   People would not be aware of the harmful side effects of the things they are ingesting.  The perfect middle ground is a difficult thing to find and seems to be an ongoing battle within our society.

 

Sources:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444083304578018790623838634.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/04/us-fda-baddrugs-idUSBRE8930SN20121004