This incident Challenger present us a case study in organizational communication, ethics and culture as it promotes or discourages necessary communication and the ethics of whistle blowing.…
Was the ethical dilemma that the company was involved in also illegal? If not, why should anyone within the company be concerned?…
When looking at the case, one can agree with this indication. Many people in both in high and lower positions did not speak up, even when they suspected or witnessed unjust activity. Some did not want to be preserved as whistleblowers and did not want to put their job on the line. The next sign to this ethical lapse, is the “Young’uns and a bigger-than-life CEO.” Scrushy was a man in a very high position. Many of his employees feared him. He was intimidating and had even carried a gun in a brief case as well as bodyguards. He only looked at his own best interest and had little to no relationship with his employees and someone had even heard him say, “If we ever get caught I would blame them all and deny…
So should we expect the same behavior from the rest of the employees, according to Trevino and Brown we should because “If leaders are observed “cooking the books,” enriching themselves at the expense of others, or lying to customers or suppliers, followers learn that such behavior is expected.” (2005, p. 72). Probably without knowing it Ebbers was setting the example for the rest of the company to act the same way, hold onto the power, micromanage and don’t worry if our personal ethics and your business ethics are different. In the after math of the WorldCom collapse reports showed that the accounting fraud occurred at the executive level and was clearly allowed by and caused by the culture that Ebbers had created in the staff (Ackman, 2003)…
Hart, H. (July 31, 2001) Anti-Corruption Provisions of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Retrieved May 3, 2011 from http://www.hollandhart.com/articles/FCPA.pdf…
One would assume with this type of treatment of upper management and th family that originated the company that employees would be give much harsher treatment, but surprisingly, they were not. In fact, it can be argued they worked in…
Conrad Black and David Radler improperly diverted million dollars from the company during the time when he was the CEO of the company. Their preferred way of redirecting money was by creating fabricated non-competition agreements with their subsidiaries. By using this…
In this case the company acted in an ethical way. This is an example of the principle of individual rights. The manager had decided to fire the employee instead of resolving the initial issue, which results in employee dissatisfaction. However, as the company does not want a bad reputation online or in the office, firing was the best solution. An employee has the right to freedom of speech but the employer also will be intolerant of any employee anti- corporate activities, which it perceives might be gross misconduct from erring employees and at the peril of organization objectives.…
(vi) Engle, ‘Understanding the UK anti-Bribery Statute, by reference to the OECD Convention and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act’ (2011).…
There are a lot of legal and ethical issues in this case. In this case the CEO of the company Kozlowski used company funds to build a secret headquarters for him and other high ranking executives. Also he used funds from the company to buy and furnish luxury apartments for him and his colleagues. These funds could have been used to make the company headquarters better or use them to invest in legal, social and renovation programs to benefit the company. For Kozlowski and Swartz, they were found guilty on 38 felony counts for allegedly stealing $170 million from Tyco and selling an l $430 million in stock options. In addition, Kozlowski was accused of taking $240 million from a program intended to help Tyco employees buy company stock but rather he used them to buy personal property. Swartz was also found guilty in a charge of forging documents of employee loan waiving that he embezzled $14 million from. That ruined many employees’ lives and investments because the heads of the company were unethical.…
Although it is not my intention to get involved in the legal aspects involved with this matter it is of mild importance to mention that both the CEO and CFO along with a handful of other employees were found guilty of numerous charges and face huge fines and jail time. Knowing that and knowing that they might get into serious trouble for their actions, why would they commit fraud? Obvious motives include greed and or pressure to please investors and creditors. It is hard to know for sure but the above mentioned most likely played a role. However, it is important to look into the background of these people to see if their decisions were persuaded in part by lack of knowledge or experience. In the case of CFO Scott Sullivan, he went to school for business, and was knowledgeable in accounting. However, lacked experience expected from an important executive. But still had to understand he was making some pretty risky decisions. On the other hand, Bernard Ebbers grew up caring more about basketball and went to pretty much the only college that would let him play. He attended Mississippi College, and graduated with a degree in physical education. After college he coached high school basketball for a while and eventually invested with a few friends into a motel, he grew this business and eventually had a few motels. He started Worldcom in 1983; its success was due to good timing, help from Wall Street big wigs interested in the telecommunications industry, and Ebbers ability to be a great salesman. This is important because Ebbers never had a true business background, was not educated or well versed in finance or accounting. He was not the typical corporate executive, but he was all of a sudden running the second largest telecommunications firm in the world. He also had no background…
The company was being mismanaged or not managed correctly. It seemed as thought the company lived by a rule of, “As long you can get away with it, then your action were okay.…
Kozlowski had the opportunity to steal the $137 million because he pretty much had control of everything and everyone involved in the company. He was paying people off to help cover up the missing funds. Kozlowski strategically placed the “right” people where he wanted them, and could control their moves. He chose him team carefully and made sure they were people who would stay quiet as long as they were reaping in the rewards as well. He was very well aware of what he was doing but he didn’t see it as being “wrong”. Some place in his mind he would have known it was wrong or else he wouldn’t have tried to cover his tracks. Since he had a lot of control over every aspect of the corporation it enabled him to get away with stealing the money as long as he did.…
We as work professionals have high levels of morals and values to uphold at all times, unprofessional acts in a work environment should be at its utmost minimum to prevent a hostile environment. These acts range from insubordination to bullying and intimidation, no one deserves to experience such acts and proper consequences should follow. Corporations all over the world experience unprofessional acts on a daily basis from employees and higher officials, their policies should not approve of these acts therefore the policies should be held to a higher standard and individuals guilty should face proper consequences immediately.…
* Raising productivity and profit: The main objective of doing any business is to make profit increasing productivity. Siemens also has the same motive and for that it is continuously looking for improved training programs to build a more competent, efficient and a highly motivated team of employees. As the training is motivating the employees highly, they are more dedicated to work for Siemens which in turn gives the company a huge production and profit every year.…