Picture yourself as a head CEO or decision-maker for a major company. Keep in mind that your basic mindset is: keep the stockholders happy, make sure that there is a constant demand for your product, job security for you and everyone else that works for the company, stay ahead of the competition, and to expand the company.
If you owned a jean company, would you produce pairs of jeans that lasted for years or would you produce jeans that started to deteriorate after a certain amount of time? Which option would create a higher demand for your product? If consumers were only required to purchase one pair of jeans that lasted them for years on end, would the desire for your product increase or decrease? Wouldn't it be better to produce a product that would need to be replaced a year or so after its first initial use?
I want you to think about all of the business decisions that you would need in order to run a successful, efficient company. Now, envision yourself as a director of a major non-profit organization. Would you use similar business-minded decisions? Now, envision yourself as a director of a major cancer association. Do these two positions require similarly minded business decisions?
We all know or have known someone personally affected by cancer. In fact, there are many that may read this that have had cancer and managed to survive it. I tip my hat to you.
I watch a lot of sports. I always feel that Major League Baseball and the National Football League bring much attention (and financial donations) to the issue of breast cancer. However, I've done a lot of thinking about this and I'm starting to have mixed feelings about cancer.
We can all admit that cancer is a horrible thing for any person and/or family to go through. However, what happens when the most heavily-funded organization in the fight against breast cancer vows to work towards a cure? From a business standpoint, does this make any sense? If you worked hard to get to the top of an organization as successful as the American Cancer Society, would you work hard enough to put yourself and tens of thousands of people out of work? In my opinion, it's like trusting the oil companies to come up with alternative fuel options or ways to decrease our dependence on foreign oil.
Even though these cancer awareness organizations are non-profit organizations, they're run like a business.
Why would Levi's create jeans that didn't rip in the same spot each and every time? Why would shoe companies build shoes that lasted? For one, it would decrease sales. Decreasing sales for any business or industry is not a desired strategy.
Businesses compete for our business and try to provide products that make our lives easier and better. Businesses are designed to create and continue a demand for their product/s. For example, Coca-Cola is the most successful soda company in the world. Why do they continually spend the most money advertising? They have a budget and create financial goals for themselves to meet so that they can continue to satisfy stockholders and to expand.
Can we say the same thing about non-profit organizations that are designed to bring awareness and to attempt to come up with a cure? Are we, in some way, merely fueling a system that becomes dependent upon donations and volunteers? Sure, we feel good donating to these causes and volunteering our time, but are we actually making a difference?
Are these organizations functioning under the same mindset as the military industrial complex? If we had world peace, there would be no need for companies that specialized in making guns, tanks, etc. We would be destroying a crucial area of the job market.
I'm not trying to demonize the American Cancer Association or any other organization that pursues a cure for all forms of cancers and other debilitating medical diagnoses. However, I'm asking people to think about it. Think about the job security of delaying or putting off a cure for cancer so that one can continue to have work. As more and more people are becoming diagnosed with cancer, the number of people willing to donate in hopes of helping to find a cure.
Cancer is something that we will all, most likely, either deal with personally or amongst those we love. As long as people have cancer, there will always be job security in the American Cancer Society.
What I'm getting at is this: Can we logically trust an organization to scientifically develop a cure for cancer when doing so would go against their basic business mindset? Would you help out the organization or business that you worked for develop a computer program or a machine that would make your job obsolete and unnecessary?
