In the article, Duska uses many exemplifications to prove his audience there are many ways that lead to unethical decisions in business. Duska states blindly obey authority is one of the reasons that leads to a good person does bad thing. He uses a real life example that we heard about bank Wells Fargo a few years ago to illustrate how good people turn out do bad things because of docility. Tellers at Wells Fargo are not really bad people but they obey their boss order to open accounts for clients without caring about their benefits and problems. In this case, they make the unethical decision in business (p.27).
Tolstedt’s knowledge unless there was a drastic lack of leadership, which in either case should prevent her from taking her riches and running. The author believes the new rules which were created after the banking crisis would allow Wells Fargo to take back the stock options and possible some of her wages, due to her inadequate supervision and subsequent fraudulent activities of her employees. Would it be ethically responsible for Wells Fargo to pull back the monies, due to the fraudulent activities, from the author’s point of view it definitely would be ethical and
The corportation has a duty to be accountable for their actions and how they affect their customers. Under the stakeholders approach they should have evalutated their decisions not to fix the axle problem and the effects it woud have it left unfixed. Since they knew the axle was a problem the negliget their customers. Furthermore, under the corportate citizen approach the corportation should have used their wealth and power to benefit society, not harm it. The least they could do after causing damages would be to compensate for
If I was Bob Turley I would have requested that the fitting be pulled regardless of the fact that it means losing the information that would assist the with companying make sense of what had happened. In the event that the site was hacked, it implies client’s data, for example, charge cards, standardized savings numbers would have been traded off. I feel pulling the attachment would have been a superior move in dealing with the potential danger. The organization did not have any crisis strategies or gear, for example, folio and legitimate firewall to handle the problem. If the assault had not stop all alone, and combined with a conceivable interruption, the results on I premier would have been a great deal all the more severe.
Even though they knew the inability of the defeat device to show the desirable performance in the actual run, they have decided to proceed with the fraudulent plan due to higher cost in safety measures, neglecting the public safety.  Through their actions of pursuing the cheating system in spite of being fully aware of the discrepancy, they have breached the first section of the WFEO, which asserts that “the engineers are to refrain from fraudulent, corrupt or criminal practices.” Even if they made this decision because they had not known the threats cheating system that could bring to the public, they would still have breached the code of ethics because in that case, they failed to “keep themselves informed in order to maintain their competence” in their profession as the WFEO practice provision ethics clearly states. If they had decided to protect the environment before the company’s profitability in the first place, the scandal and its consequences could have been
In the first place, nowadays we know that the audit firm was heavily conflicted on some client accounts, receiving millions of dollars in fees in return for the compilation of better audit reports. In addition to this, the management of the audit firm was more focused on the generation of revenue rather than on the quality and independence of their audit work. Another flaw in Arthur Andersen’s governance procedures was the fact that the executives did not manage to control and address the behaviour of internal lawyers and senior audit partners, who showed signs of misconduct and failed to abide by professional and ethical matters. Another mistake that the audit firm made was that when faced with suspicious manoeuvres within some financial statements, no further actions and investigations took place, giving rise to further wrongdoings. Furthermore, some partners of the audit firm were allowed to claim superiority over specialists and auditors, leading to conflicts of interest.
To answer the first question, no, growth alone is not sustainable. A quote stated by Bill Mckibben says, “To truly stop ruining the planet, society must break its most debilitating habit: growth.”(Laszlo). He believes that the change will not happen fast enough to preserve the planet. What is the role of government and of the nonprofit sector? The government plays a role by creating regulations for businesses to follow.
It begins with the government working against the protagonist’s aims and desires and only focusing on what they believe is the correct way to deal with the post-war. Most of the time, the protagonist acts different than the rest of the community making him or her a risk or threat to the government. The obvious result of this situation, for the governments, is to eliminate the risk or destroy it by any means necessary. The oppression is frequent and common. It always results in the loss of civil liberties, sexual freedom, and privacy.
Arthur Andersen was aware of the use of SPV’s and even considered the transactions to be risky. However, “audit procedures did not reflect consideration of this risk” (Edelman & Nicholson, 2010). In 2001, the SEC was beginning to investigate Enron. David Duncan had ordered the auditors of Enron to shred any related documents. “The firm lost the majority of its clients and most of its talented employees” (Edelman & Nicholson).
Within the psychology of distrust there lies a point where your own personal opinion of a topic that is ingrained within your core beliefs or morals is challenged with what the mind perceives as ample evidence the brain goes on the defensive and rejects all idea opposite to what it feels is its own this is known as a backfire effect (M.Smith How Can the Use of Reverse Psychology Backfire?) and when this happens there is a point where the brain cannot trust itself. While working for big businesses both have developed a major distrust in corporations as a whole. This could come from the basic need to have a scapegoat in situations where you feel wronged (Nyhan, Brendan, and Jason Reifler. “When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions.”).