COMPARISON OF GSK CODE OF CONDUCT
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report was to review the codes of conduct of the Central Queensland University(CQU) and that of GlaxoSmithKline(GSK) in order to identify the different stakeholder affected, the ethical issues addressed by these documents, to explore the use of mandatory and voluntary practice in codes of conduct and finally to consider the application of corporate governance and transparency in these organizations.
Stakeholders are the lifeblood of an organization. These are the groups of people that without which a company would cease to be. The report notes most importantly that both companies consider their employees and cliental as their most valuable stakeholders.
The ethical issues considered range vastly from concerns with intellectual property abuse to regulations concerning lying, bulling and simply ethical conduct. The report significantly establishes that, though vastly different in the services they provide and the stakeholders involved, both companies face the same ethical challenges.
When comparing mandatory regulations and voluntary practice the report establishes a significant difference between the lay out of CQU’s code compared to that of GSK. The report highlights the different approaches in regards to phrasing similar aspects of the two documents.
As far as corporate governance and transparency is concerned the report discusses briefly the difference in governance method of the two companies and notes the similarities in how both parties engage the issue of transparency.
In conclusion the report notes that the most significant difference between the two documents is in the contradictory layout of the documents. CQU’s code has been put together as a document specifically designed to inform or right and wrong whereas GSK’s code inspires personal conviction and stewardship. Further study to be considered is the implication of the different communication styles and how they affect the reader’s commitment to
The purpose of this report was to review the codes of conduct of the Central Queensland University(CQU) and that of GlaxoSmithKline(GSK) in order to identify the different stakeholder affected, the ethical issues addressed by these documents, to explore the use of mandatory and voluntary practice in codes of conduct and finally to consider the application of corporate governance and transparency in these organizations.
Stakeholders are the lifeblood of an organization. These are the groups of people that without which a company would cease to be. The report notes most importantly that both companies consider their employees and cliental as their most valuable stakeholders.
The ethical issues considered range vastly from concerns with intellectual property abuse to regulations concerning lying, bulling and simply ethical conduct. The report significantly establishes that, though vastly different in the services they provide and the stakeholders involved, both companies face the same ethical challenges.
When comparing mandatory regulations and voluntary practice the report establishes a significant difference between the lay out of CQU’s code compared to that of GSK. The report highlights the different approaches in regards to phrasing similar aspects of the two documents.
As far as corporate governance and transparency is concerned the report discusses briefly the difference in governance method of the two companies and notes the similarities in how both parties engage the issue of transparency.
In conclusion the report notes that the most significant difference between the two documents is in the contradictory layout of the documents. CQU’s code has been put together as a document specifically designed to inform or right and wrong whereas GSK’s code inspires personal conviction and stewardship. Further study to be considered is the implication of the different communication styles and how they affect the reader’s commitment to