BASF Case

When we speak on BASFs efforts to restrict stakeholder pressure, the stakeholders, whom we are referring to, are the towns commission and its populace. The dickens primary efforts which BASF has made to resist their pressure are assuaging their fears and subverting their demands.Now, BASF attempted to their exempt fears by claiming no third party waste would be brought to this sensitive waste facility. They also claimed that all waste, whether toxic or non-toxic, would be incinerated and, thus, should redact no threat to the townspeople.Additionally, BASF released two printed volumes which detailed how the waste would be incinerated. And, repeatedly, the political party assured the public that building the new plant would create jobs and be perfectly safe for the community. They proclaimed that there would be no denigrating effect on the environment now, nor at any time in the future. On the subversion end, BASF used many techniques. They cajoled the county commission into sell ing the attribute without requiring appropriate background data and environmental information.Also, they altered their proposal after submitting it to the town council, and the data which they released was highly suspect according to a topical anaesthetic professor. They also used high powered lawyers in efforts to push through the lands sale and to obtain the appropriate environmental documentation. This certification would allow the plants development to proceed. All of these tactics were a subversion of the local townspeoples trust and wishes. However, these have been relatively affective measures in resisting stakeholder pressure, and, likely, the plant will be built.