For the most part, corporations do a pretty good job of designing and releasing good products. Since we are in a huge capitalist society, companies put a lot of effort into their products to turn a large profit. Designing something while cutting corners, not testing before release, and executing unethical procedures, would put a huge dent in a company's bottom line. Design controls ensure all "i's" are dotted and "t's" are crossed before releasing a product to consumers to minimize recalls, malfunctions, and poor product quality. 

A companies design controls are an integral part of a safe and effective quality system. The assurance and controls process includes a total systems approach starting from the development of device through design, production, distribution, service, and maintenance. The development and approval of the designs includes designing a device and the total manufacturing processes. Design control focuses on all aspects of designing a product and the implementation of the design. These mechanisms avoid revenue loss from design failure to law actions from unsafe distributions. 

I believe that corporate responsibility is a must.  I think that anyone who is part of a design of a product from the creational the way to the complete product should have some responsibility.  This makes sure that the product that is being put out is not "half-assed".  Pardon my language.  When companies see that other companies are being held accountable, then they will follow suit to prevent lawsuits or blame.  I wish people and companies would just want to do this out of the kindness of their heart, but money is powerful, so some companies will cut corners on inspections of machines, quality of materials and labor.  This all saves them money in the back end, but risks faulty product that can hurt consumers.

I believe that companies are taking corporate responsibility. I think at this point in time, especially in the medical industry they have to. There is some sort of moral principles that are guiding them to do so, and it is for the benefit not only of the organization but of the consumers as well. In order to get recognition, be trusted, and make a profit, a company has to be trustworthy and dependable. I would not invest in or want to be a part of a company that doesn’t have any morals and only cares about profit because, at the end of the day, consumers are what keep corporations afloat. Reputation and dependability follow you. And not only for medical devices but also being conscious of the environment and the impact their device has, and corporations are actively working to conduct their operations in ways that benefit society and the environment rather than harm them.

I think medical device companies are very adamant about corporate responsibility. There are many costs associated with putting out bad product, being unethical and having flawed design controls. Companies will lose a lot of money, risk being sued, and overall fail if there is no corporate responsibility. There are laws and regulations in place to ensure that companies are being responsible and ensuring safety and efficacy. Many companies make sure that their quality assurance and control departments are well trained to ensure that compliance and regulation is being followed. Compaines also train within to make sure that the company is responsible and producing valuable and quality products. 

We live in a day and age were big corporations are becoming more transparent with their business practices. As customers are moving to products and devices that may have a lower impact on the inventors or to human beings. Creating safe products is vital for large companies. This allows customers to form bond with the company and its products. Feeling comfortable using them and ultimately continuing to buy a product. Once a product needs to be recalled our safety concerns develop after testing stages it is hard for these companies to recoup losing a large percentage of their customer base that initially brought their product. I believe it is in a companies best interest to take their time to produce products that are safe not all to ensure safety of customers, but to also remain in business. 

I think that corporations are taking effort to maintain corporate responsibility but they are all doing it in very sneaky ways. For example, say if a company wants to show they have neutral emissions. They might do so by buying a bunch of farmland and then say that they are then neutral. Does this make sense, yes. But, I think they should take some effort like maybe plant some trees to get to their number. I think buying a bunch of land that is already there, is kind of like a short cut. 

Corporate responsibility is pretty important to companies due to the long-lasting effects that a company can have on people through their products. This type of responsibility tends to be very wide in terms of what a company does and their image to the public, such as ethical, environmental, and social responsibility under the umbrella of corporate responsibility. Companies notably such as Loreal understand the need to save the environment and have endeavored to, in their own way, cut down on unnecessary packaging, use sustainable packaging, and reduce carbon emissions. Loreal, in this case, understands their cooperative responsibility to help the environment, and the public sees this as a way to view loreal in a more trustworthy image, so their products in turn are seen as such. In a more serious tone, corporate responsibility in a medical device company would be more ethically inclined due to the detrimental damage that can occur if the consumer is not aware of certain risks. When a medical device company designs their products, they want them to perform a certain task for the user, whether it be an implant, pacemaker, or other form of medical device. The company has a corporate responsibility, such as if a device has a defect several years down the line. The company would then be inclined to notify the public about the defect, showing that the company had the corporate responsibility to bring attention to the public about the issue, but this can also go in the other direction and have a poor corporate responsibility of not speaking out, thus showing it can vary from company to company.

I would also agree with the others here that corporate responsibility is taken very seriously when it comes to medical device output. I think naturally companies are adamant about putting out a "good product," but there are also so many controls and governing bodies in play that shape the way they have to act when promoting a product in the first place. Especially if this company has an effective QMS, it's going to be very hard to NOT come out with a respectable product, at least from a regulatory or design controls perspective. I think the greatest issue comes with, releasing a product, seeing some successes, but also seeing some failures. I think some companies may have the tendency to not address these failures out in the field, or try to claim that these "harms to patients" are due to some other reasons and not their own device. It is here where recalls, or public action needs to take place in order to prevent further harm that was caused by their product. For example, Allergan was a company that created textured breast implants which caused their patients to contract a rare form of cancer, which was relevant specifically to their implants. The company's negligence and lack of response to FDA recall requests, caused many patients serious harm and even death. The lack of response on THIS company's end represents the much darker (and I would argue rarer side) of corporate responsibility. 

This is usually written out within the companies mission/vision statement. They really care about the quality of their products, especially in the medical field, so they will take every effort to do each of the steps according to the standards. It’s the people within the company, especially the managers, who make or break this idea and if they are someone that is very adamant about making good quality products and enjoy the different processes that go into developing that product, usually they’re going to be reputable. It’s different for different organizations but where I work, the PMs really do value the quality of their products so they personally would go through every aspect of the manufacturing and processing of that device especially the tedious tasks. Usually PMs do not do this type of work but by doing that, they get themselves involved and can come up with ideas to improve the process. 

In my perspective, there can be numerous compelling reasons for an interim design review meeting. A significant rationale for such a meeting may be the discovery of a design flaw, necessitating a redesign of a specific component to ensure safety. Furthermore, if trials reveal adverse reactions arising from the device, whether internally or externally, adjustments to materials or other measures may be necessary to mitigate these effects.

Moreover, these meetings can serve as a mechanism for the project leader to reconnect with the team and evaluate the progression of the project. It's also crucial to engage engineers and marketing/sales representatives, particularly when the product is already in the market. Marketing and sales teams can offer valuable insights regarding how customers perceive the product based on their reviews and feedback. Simultaneously, engineers can participate in resolving any major design issues that may arise, while also aiding the supply chain in identifying its specific needs. Additionally, these meetings can help manufacturing determine the manufacturing time required for each part, streamlining the production process.

Companies should have a high sense of corporate responsibility, particularly within the medical device and pharmaceutical industry due to their products having a direct impact on patient health. The implications that can result from not valuing corporate responsibility could be extremely detrimental to the company, likely resulting in many lawsuits as well as a damaged reputation, which could pave the way for the company having to shut down. Additionally, if the company does not have proper testing and documentation, the company could fail different audits, and the product would not be approved by the FDA as well as other regulatory bodies. Since the healthcare industry is one of the most highly regulated industries around, cutting corners will be something that will catch up to a company. In the world today where brand reputation means so much, it would be extremely unwise to not carefully consider various corporate responsibilities. 

Like most of the comments, I believe that companies are taking their corporate responsibility very seriously. Companies are now expected to conduct business ethically, addressing matters like honesty, integrity, and transparency in their dealings with patients and healthcare providers. Furthermore, regulatory agencies like the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Europe and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States impose strict standards and regulations on the medical device business. Businesses must abide by these rules by law in order to release safe and functional products onto the market. In conclusion, medical device businesses prioritize patient safety because safety concerns can have serious negative effects on patients as well as the company's finances and reputation.

Whether or not a company has good ethical responsibility to put out a good, safe product, they are upmost certainly minded with some sort of fiscal responsibility to make a profit. So they certainly have a motivation to put out a well defined product that is safe and works as intended. Their reputation to both regulators and the consumer base is key for their success and prosperity in the market. In a weird ironic sense, the corporate responsibility of ensuring their product is safe and well versed for their target consumer also aligns with their legal and personal responsibility to turn out a legal profit.