Reference no: EM133872958

Question 1. Select ONE company from the dropdown list Monster Beverage

Select 2 countries.
Question 2. ONE from each of dropdown lists that you will use throughout the case study

i.e., ONE country from the Northern Hemisphere ONE country from the Southern Hemisphere Germany
Brazil

Question 3. Briefly explain at least two reasons why your chosen company was/is considered a "worst." Examples of reasons might include employee issues; customer or consumer complaints; financial problems; law violations; litigation; environmental or social issues Get online assignment help in the USA!

Monster Beverage is dubbed the "worst" corporation due to expanding energy drink health and safety problems. The corporation is related to various negative health consequences, notably in teens and young adults, its major customers. Monster product abuse has been linked to heart disease, high blood pressure, and mortality. Monster was investigated by the FDA in 2012 after five deaths were linked to the drink (Costantino et al., 2023). The FDA did not prove Monster was the cause, but the case showed the dangers of highly caffeinated beverages sold with little regulation and strong child marketing. Monster's refusal to change labeling and marketing to minors have earned it medical experts' and advocacy groups' disapproval.
Monster Beverage's controversial marketing strategy has been accused of targeting youngsters despite the consequences of high caffeine intake in teens. Monster targets teens and young people with edgy branding, extreme sports sponsorships, and social media marketing. The American Academy of Pediatrics has slammed the corporation for making energy drinks seem "cool" or innocuous. Bleakley et al. (2022) discovered that energy drink firms, particularly Monster, disproportionately marketed on adolescent-friendly TV and online material. Aggressive marketing harms public health messaging and poses corporate responsibility problems. Monster's youth-focused branding in the U.S. and internationally has worsened its already poor reputation since many countries regulate energy drink sales to minors.
Monster Beverage has been criticized for terrible labor standards and workplace culture. Many former employees reported sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation at the company in 2018 (Spiliopoulou&Witcomb, 2022). Monster and several of its officials were sued for allegedly mistreating women and failing to handle these allegations. Vivien Killilea, a former executive, sued for being fired for speaking out against harassment and sexism in the firm. These charges indicate a poisonous executive culture, which undermines the company's rules and leadership. Monster denies the charges, but the public and employee rights groups have criticized their volume and severity.
Monster Beverage has also been criticized for its environmental sustainability and transparency issues. Monster scored low in environmental categories due to its lack of environmental disclosures and corporate responsibility measures, according to Boiral et al. (2024). Monster lacks transparency on carbon emissions, energy use, waste management, and environmental goals, unlike many of its competitors. Environmental watchdogs and investment research groups like As You Sow and MSCI ESG Research have rated this lack of accountability poorly. Companies are obliged to disclose and improve their environmental impact as climate change and sustainability gain emphasis. Monster's lack of corporate responsibility and transparency have bolstered its unfavorable reputation.