I could envision skincare companies, like Neutrogena and Aveeno, or cosmetics companies, like Clinique and Lancôme, that could risk public safety if they were managed by over-networked systems and then hacked. As companies whose products go directly on human skin, there is a much risk to be wary of. The Internet should never have access to sensitive information like the “recipes”/exact composition of these products, so that should definitely be the first thing to be carefully guarded as well as the machines that are a part of the product-making process. These two components-the recipe and the machines-are at the core of production, and as the case study showed, if they are online, losing access and control over these “keys to success” is a high risk. In addition to those, those involved in the production process should be highly vetted to ensure their trust and responsibility in overseeing and facilitating the production process. Safeguarding the production process is critical to ensuring the safety and integrity of a product from being tampered with by others. I would also recommend that experimental products (i.e. test products being developed in labs) should also be carefully guarded to protect their ideas and potential market advantages.
If Sara remained quiet or went unheard, I believe the CEO and company would have continued to go down and/or further accelerate their journey into digitization as the solution (not cause) to the hackings. Sara’s line of thinking disrupted a groupthinkesque train of thought, but without it, everyone would’ve quickly rallied behind more security without giving a second thought due to the heat of the moment. Without Sara, other perspectives wouldn’t have been considered. Sara was definitely brave to make her voice heard, and as a woman and even though she is deputy to the COO, she doesn’t seem as high up as others in the room, so she challenges and overcomes these assumptions of her as a woman who isn’t a C-level executive and possibly doesn’t have as much technical prowess as the CTO or other “pro-digitizing” gang members. It’s important that Sara did so because it highlights the important of having a breadth of ideas and in this case, considering if “progress” is actually progress or not.
I can see my project team learning and applying a lot from this case study. As we begin to prototype and discuss various functions we want our product to have, and eventually develop the technology, it is important to invite and consider every point of view without any assumptions given someone’s identity and background. The security and integrity of our product should also be key, especially if it is going to be connected to the internet. We will definitely need to consider all the potential risks and weigh safety/security against progress and profit – that should be an interesting discussion with potential disagreements/different points of view, but I still look forward to learning from it and getting to a shared understanding on the topic with my team!
