Description of the Chosen Organization
One of the most important points to learn in public administration courses is the way how nonprofit and government-related organizations work. The first thing that has to be remembered is that they work differently compared to for-profits mainly based on the fact that their actions and behaviors are often not motivated by profit. However, critics would suggest that all organizations, be it nonprofit or for-profit may at some point, be validly considered as a form of for-profit organization because they both rely on a steady stream of income paired with sound and effective forms of budget management in order to survive. In this paper, the author selected a nonprofit organization to be reviewed. The chosen nonprofit organization was the American Cancer Society (ACS).
The ACS is a domestic volunteer-based health organization that is aimed at finding ways to cure and eliminate cancer. This nonprofit was founded in 1913 as a form of response to the then growing number of people with different kinds of cancer. It is one of the largest, oldest, and perhaps most successful nonprofits in the United States, having survived and operated for more than a hundred years now. In terms of size, it has more than nine hundred offices throughout the United States. It operates based on a decentralized form of management.
The task of managing the society significantly varies among the eleven geographical divisions. Medical and lay persons and volunteers can directly participate in the many programs of the society whose objective and focus is “to save lives by helping people stay well, helping people get well, by finding cures, and fighting back” .
Major Concerns for the Organization
One of the most remarkable issues involving nonprofits including (primarily) the ACS is their violation of certain codes including Conflicts of Interests (COI). Conflicts of Interests happen when an organization (or a person) finds itself in a position where it can derive benefits from actions and or decisions that they are made to oppose.
Within the context of the American Cancer Society, an example of a scenario where there may be grounds for COI would be one where it develops allegiance and or affiliation with organizations and certain key people whom they are made to oppose, based on its internal mandate. Operationally, the ACS’ internal mandate is to eradicate cancer. There is just a multitude of ways to do that; it is a complex battle and the fact that cancer is a broad and not a fully understood disease only complicates the conundrum. From the list of possible interrelated managerial and administrative process issues provided, this issue would most likely fall under ethical decision making.
It has been identified in various studies that certain medical and pharmaceutical industries are cashing in on the growing trend of people suffering from cancer; they are doing so by selling drugs and other products to the growing number of people with cancer. This means that the only way for those firms’ business to grow and continue is if the number of people of people with cancer would significantly increase year on year.
Now, this is not something that is a hundred percent proven by the principles of logic and economic rationality would suggest that men and organizations would always go for the most financially rational decision —in this case, that would be to participate in activities and programs that would increase the pharmaceutical firms’ market.
Focusing again on the ACS, considering the information about drug and pharmaceutical firms discussed above, the last thing that the public (especially those with cancer or with a relative who has cancer) would want to see is an ACS that is forging partnerships and alliances with pharmaceutical firms. Unfortunately, according to previously published reports about cancer care, ACS has been blatantly violating Conflicts of Interest clauses by forging obvious allegiances with the parties it is supposed to wage a war with.
According to a report published by Epstein (2011), a cancer prevention expert from the Illinois School of Public Health in Chicago, the ACS has grown indifferent to cancer prevention—its internal mandate and this can be evidenced by the huge contributions it received from Excalibur donors many of whom are associated with cases of manufacturing carcinogenic products (e.g. petrochemical, industrial waste, junk food, big pharmaceutical and biotech companies).
Proposed Research Question
The proposed research question in this case asks “in what ways the ACS has violated the COI principle when it comes to its internal mandate of eradicating cancer”. The proposed research methodology is the use of a qualitative exploratory or expert review approach. In this approach, the author of the paper will interview a panel of experts on the matter in an effort to gain their expert opinion or perspective on the matter. A framework of open ended questions would be asked from them with the goal of comparing what they have to say about the issue. The experts would essentially act as the respondents in the study. The goal of the study is to establish, based on expert opinion, and whether the ACS indeed violated the unwritten COI clause based on currently available data — e.g. sources of funding contributions, among others.
References
American Cancer Society. (2016). Who We Are. ACS Website, http://www.cancer.org/aboutus/whoweare/index.
Epstein, S. (2011). The American Cancer Society Trivializes Cancer Risks: Blatant Conflicts of Interest. Illinois School of Public Health, Chicago, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samuel-s-epstein/the-american-cancer-socie_b_568292.html.
Loewenstein, G. (2000). Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior. The American Economic Review, 426-432.
