first thing i would do is to set up a meeting with their company management team and tell them everything is under control. provide them a timeline that how am i going to solve this problem. Then go back to my own team start to figure out where the problem is and how to fix it in the shortest time possible. i think give out samples are very basic things to do. They can help us find little defect fast so there won't be any problems or risks after the product final release.  

This week's simulation tasked teams to find out what is causing the product to fail cytotoxicity testing at Nelmsa Toxicology. Due to this result, the verification of the product is at a halt and further testing of the ingredients is required. Supplying samples to potential clients could assist in identifying the defects in the product prior to the completion of the product release. However, as a part of the agreement for the use of samples, there should be a non-disclosure agreement included that will allow the company and client to only discuss product defects amongst each other before the final release. But if the information did get out to news outlets, it's essential to meet with management and have a statement prepared that discusses the next steps in the process of testing the ingredients in the coating.

Hi, releasing a product that has not yet passed all the necessary verification steps is a very serious issue. This can jeopardize the credibility of the company let alone its overall reputation. In addition, a client might be lost to a competitor as is the case in the simulation. Apart from the solution that will be proposed for the simulation in terms of the product, the overzealous employee would definitely have to be reprimanded. He should also be warned that similar actions might result in more serious consequences. 

This simulation is a great example of why it is important to follow protocol. I feel there would be backlash even if the product worked. Not following the proper protocol does not reflect well on companies or employers or employees. This kind of scenario could allow for serious damage to the company making the product as well as the one using it. Understanding this, the reputation of the providing company could decrease, likewise for the employees with the formula. There would need to be more preliminary testing done prior to signing agreements for licensing the product, otherwise the employees which pushed this along as well as the employers are at fault for the products deficiency. 

Like Jada mentioned, most companies would have a non-disclosure agreement set up amongst all participating parties when working on a new product to ensure any news about the product, good and bad, does not get released prematurely until the product is ready to be introduced to the wider public. Given that these agreements are legally binding documents, any violation of the NDA would result in legal action that would put the violator of the document in a worse position than the company both in a financial sense and a professional sense as other companies would take notice and avoid working with such a person. The over-zealous manager in this scenario should definitely be reprimanded for their actions as at the very least the NDA should have been signed before allowing the potential client to do anything with the product. Ideally, both the NDA and the contract itself should have been signed but if a potential client wants to sample a product before committing, then an NDA would be enough.

Personally I don't think reprimanding or punishing the employee is the correct way to go about it, I think there should be a meeting to discuss how to best remedy the situation between the appropriate parties. What's done is done, and yes while it was a big mistake nothing gets done besides having an unhappy marketing manager by reprimanding. There can be an RCA meeting after to discuss what happened and maybe there will be solid actions that come out of that meeting to ensure that something like this doesn't happen again. I think if the news possibly got out to a news outlet or other media, we would try our best to do some damage control on the situation even though it would hurt our reputation. In that case since there was such a large firestorm started due to that perhaps I would take some action regarding that employee.

I agree with the above posts that mention the team should discuss the situation and what could have been done differently to ensure a more favorable outcome. I believe the employee jeopardized the reputation of the company's quality management system. If the product were already on the market, this occurrence could have resulted in a recall or other field related action. Furthermore there should definitely be repercussions that the employee did not follow proper protocol. It might be beneficial for the company to implement more training procedures on the proper protocol for related scenarios. What are some other ways to prevent a situation like this from happening again in the future? 

Aside from actually finding the root of the cause of cytotoxicity, I think what Dr. Simon wanted us to take away was that it is imperative to get through all verification steps in the process before anything else happens. Now, the first impression is you have a faulty product and even if everything checks out in the future it will take more money, time, and effort now to market that your product is in fact functional because you got off on the wrong foot. 

The simulation showed that the product was cytotoxic, and the first thing to do would be to go back to see the risk analysis to see if this was a high risk to begin with to ensure it was taken into consideration first. Additionally, I would notify the head of the management team to assemble everyone to let them know they cannot move on with production, find alternatives, go back to planning, finding where there are faults in the verification testing, and also notify the clients (since they need to know the project will take longer or potentially be more monetary wise since additional testing/steps/materials will be used). 

For a lot of projects, NDA’s are signed therefor if they broke a contract they have to be reprimanded because it not only tarnishes the companies integrity but also they broke an agreement. 

If they didn’t sign NDA’s and happened to speak to the media, that employee should be spoken to by the management team as how their actions hurt the company as well as their credibility/reputation for future projects within the company. 

Hello,

If the product was found to be cytotoxic, I would immediately launch an investigation into the cause of the problem. This would involve a thorough review of all the manufacturing and testing processes, as well as an evaluation of the product's ingredients and potential sources of contamination. I would also reach out to the client and notify them of the issue, as well as offer any support or assistance needed to help address the situation. If the client were to go public with the information, I would take a proactive approach and issue a statement to the media acknowledging the issue and outlining the steps we are taking to address it. It's important to be transparent about the issue and demonstrate a commitment to finding a solution. In terms of the employee who gave the sample prematurely, I would first review our company policies and procedures to determine if any disciplinary action is warranted. If it's found that the employee violated company policy or acted in a way that put the company at risk, then appropriate action would be taken, which could include reprimand or termination. However, it's also important to evaluate the circumstances that led to the premature distribution of the sample and identify any underlying issues in the company's culture or processes that may have contributed to the situation.

First of all, I will have a meeting with everyone involved in the project. Get a profound analysis and learn what is happening in more detail. I would like to have all the documentation ready regarding this product. What materials were used to make it, and what equipment was utilized. Every record possible regarding the product, legal documentation, and even the cytotoxicity results from the other lab, is necessary. Keeping it within the company is essential until a final resolution is reached. This mistake is not just one man’s job, it is the company’s fault. So punishing the employee is not the correct way to address the issue. We need to evaluate what made the manager send the product to the client when it was not finished.  The entire company is compromised, and this needs to be discussed with higher management as well since they are most likely addressing the issue to the media.