2 ms·
Be careful about diluting responsibility---if everyone can point to someone else, no one will make a hard (and not immediately profitable) decision. In all of
by mcguire 6y ago
Be careful about diluting responsibility---if everyone can point to someone else, no one will make a hard (and not immediately profitable) decision.
In all of those studies, etc., there is someone at the top who does, and should, make the ultimate decision, just like when building a bridge, there is an engineer who puts his career on the line.
- whatshisface 6y agoIf you're going to assign responsibility, you need to assign it to people who know the right decision to make. If you assign responsibility to a janitor or a chemist for any torts set against the company, then janitors and chemists will simply quit working there. The only person who could begin to approach responsibility would be an executive with the authority to organize and pay for clinical trials and toxicity studies.
- ska 6y ago> authority to organize and pay for clinical trials and toxicity studies. But further to that, if said executive does follow regulatory guidance and accepted practice but the product has a problem, should they really be held individually responsible? For the clinical trials example, if a trial fails to turn up a significant problem, is it the exec's fault or the regulators? The regulators or the legislative body?
- whatshisface 6y agoOftentimes, regulatory bodies make companies immune to lawsuits in exchange for compliance. That leads to there being no incentive against creating products that are compliant, yet dangerous. It might be a good idea to reform the system so that harm is the ultimate decider.