Wells Fargo Case

Communication and Decision Making

Wells Fargo Asks Court to Force Customers to Arbitration in Face Accounts Cases The New York Times article by Reuters, reported that Wells Fargo, who ranks as one of the third largest banks in America is in hot water once again for scandalous misrepresentation of terms and policy arbitrations concerning insider fake bank accounts that were created by previous Wells Fargo employees that were recently fired. The problems exist within the written rules of the documents. Apparently, when the customers opened their “real” accounts, the employees opened fake accounts under their names. The problems stem from the disagreement of fairness in differences of opinion between the bank and its customers because of the
fraud. The customers that are suing the bank are requesting that their lawsuits should be documented and settled in a private sector instead of the US Court system.

In Wells Fargo’s case, their written documents, or rules states that the customers cannot file a class action law suit or sue the bank for any reason.
Wells Fargo argues, although the accounts were fake, it is customary for customers to sign an agreement when opening an account stating that the organization is not responsible for any liabilities within the contract once it was signed. Twelve months’ prior, the US court opposed a class action law suit against Wells Fargo’s customers on “signed arbitration clauses.” In 2011, the Supreme Court pronounced that mandating arbitration is standard practice for financial products such as bank accounts, however, the customers are not in agreement with the court’s decision. The court’s decision is an example of The Classical Model of Decision Making based off of the descriptive model.

(George & Jones, 2012), describes decision making as “..the process by which members of an organization choose a specific course of action to respond to the opportunities and problems that confront them.” Since Wells Fargo is responsible for their employee’s actions within the organization, they are also responsible to the public to correct any wrong doings. Unfortunately, Wells Fargo operates under the March and Simon’s Administrative Model of Decision Making. The solutions are satisfactory instead of
acceptable.

This is one of the largest scandals in Wells Fargo’s history, it has caused damage to their reputation. Wells Fargo should have implemented a safeguard system that could have avoided these crimes such as monitoring their employees. This should have been a priority of CEO John Stumpf, who has since resigned. This decision has also lead Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and others representatives of the Democratic lawmakers in Congress along with The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau get involve because the outcome will eventually affect other financial institutions. Wells Fargo need to be aware of how they treat and value their clients and customers, they are the life line of financial and non-financial organizations. If customers do not purchase products, organizations will eventually go out of business. Unfortunately, the leader or spokesperson for Wells Fargo declined to communicate to the public concerning the filing in the United States District Court in Utah on Wednesday, November 23, 2016. Meanwhile, Wells Fargo have been campaigning to polish their blemished reputation. Author, Jane Jordan, made important points in the podcast, “Managing Media Through a Crisis.” concerning communication claiming that a spokesperson should be in the frontline, and the organization should acknowledge their problem and empathize with the victims. Once an organization breaks the trust of customers it is very hard to gain their trust back again. Last week, Wells Fargo offered free mediation services to customers that are affected by the scam. This does not seem encouraging to their customers.

References