E-mail address: FirstSearch@oclc.org Location: http://FirstSearch.oclc.org
 Return |
|---|
Fast and loose in Xanadu.Source:
The world of business sometimes appears to be an ethical obstacle course, especially when a company's arena is, well, the world itself. It's difficult enough to keep track of a firm's legal responsibilities in the United States, but add the laws of another country, toss in questions of personal and corporate morality, and it's enough to leave most executives completely bewildered. To recreate that uneasy sensation of being between an ethical rock and a hard place, Charles Nesson, professor at Harvard Law School, led 11 senior executives, lawyers, and others on a hypothetical business mission filled with enough perils and pitfalls to challenge even a seasoned ethics officer. The mission was part of a recent Business Ethics Conference held by The Conference Board. Participating were:. Ronald Berenbeim, senior research associate, corporate governance, The Conference Board. Keith T. Darcy, vice president, associate corporate ethics officer, Prudential Securities Inc. Joan Elise Dubinsky, senior legal counsel, The Mitre Corp. Verne E. Henderson, professor of organizational behavior and ethics, Arthur D. Little Management Education Institute. Eugene Herbert, principal, H.B. Associates. Barbara Spyridon Pope, principal, Pope Consulting Group. William T. Redgate, vice president, business practices, The Dun & Bradstreet Corp. Michael Rion, principal, Resources for Ethics and Management. Paul L. Robert, associate counsel, UTC-Pratt & Whitney. Lori A. Tansey, president, International Business Ethics Group. A.J. Vogl, editor of Across the Board. Charles Nesson: Our venue is the island of Xanadu. It's an island nation in Asia ruled by a man who's president for life, in absolute control of this country for 15 years. He's anxious to open his country to trade. It's a very attractive place for doing business. It's near lucrative Asian markets. Its people are poor but technically proficient and educated and eager to work. Mr. Herbert, you work for Omnitech, an American company. You won't be getting a chance to see Xanadu's beaches; your job is to make a deal allowing Omnitech to open a plant in Xanadu. You've gotten marching orders from Mark Megabyte, the CEO of Omnitech, who has designated this a key strategy for the company. Omnitech makes a wide variety of industrial and consumer products based on microprocessing. In order to open a plant, you need to go through an elaborate application process. No company has ever successfully navigated that process without having the specific personal approval of the minister of trade. Now, the minister is a sophisticated man-likes gourmet food, wine, appreciates travel, fancy cars, and nice toys. You need the minister's approval. Your researchers have led you to believe that it's in the tradition of this company to open up relationships with gifts. What do you think, Mr. Herbert? Talk this over with Mr. Robert, would you? He's partners with you in this enterprise. Eugene Herbert: I don't think there's anything inappropriate about asking the minister to have dinner. What do you think, Paul, should we take this guy to dinner? Paul Robert: We ought to ask him why it is so difficult to process those applications. It's probably because they don't have any word-processing equipment. This is an opportunity, I think. Charles Nesson: That would be perfectly OK, to fit out his office with word-processing equipment? Paul Robert: Not for him personally, but for the government of Xanadu, perhaps. We're talking about setting up a business that's going to bring Xanadu into the 20th century technologically speaking. I'm not going to provide him anything that's a personal benefit. Michael Rion: Before I went to dinner or any of that, I'd want some sense of what we are getting ourselves into. Why haven't other companies been successful? I'd want to make a very careful decision as to whether we even want to locate in Xanadu before I had all these conversations. Eugene Herbert: On the other hand, Mark Megabyte has sent us out here, and I don't want to go back and report to him that we've had second thoughts. A.J. Vogl: I've got two questions here. First: Is the fix on? And second: Are we willing to participate in the fix? This is a sophisticated man, this minister. He doesn't want anything too overt. So maybe we would use a broker as a go-between in this situation if we decided we wanted to be in Xanadu that badly. A broker could offer him a substantial gift. I think you have to take into consideration whether or not the culture tolerates bribery. It sounds as if it very well might. There's some additional information we need here: How secure is this person's position? Is anything he agrees to, either by fair means or foul, an agreement that is enforceable? Eugene Herbert: What's being suggested is that outside experts be consulted. Now, they could be brokers, but it really should be ethics consultants. Someone who understands the culture and can calculate what the outcomes might be, good or bad. And, of course, down the line you might have to bring a lawyer into it to see if you conform with American laws. Charles Nesson: Are we arguing about whether we're going to do business in Xanadu, or are we arguing about how we're going to do it? Mark Megabyte is the CEO of Omnitech. Before you left, he put his hand on your shoulder and said, "The strategy of the company is riding with you. Go get 'em.". A.J. Vogl: If you get over there and begin to realize this is not a good idea, then in the long run it's better for Mark and it's better for Omnitech if you go back and say, "This isn't going to work." Of course, saying that may put your career at risk. Barbara Pope: If you pass something that the U.S. government would think of as a bribe, and your company gets in trouble under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and Mark Megabyte goes to jail because there is personal criminal liability under FCPA-then I think your career is going to be in a significant danger in that scenario as well. Charles Nesson: That happened fast. Here we were just taking this guy out to dinner. And now our CEO's in the hoosegow. Mr. Darcy, how does it work, in fact? Keith Darcy: There are tangible benefits that we bring to Xanadu. We should be discussing with the minister the creation of new jobs, both by our company and by the subcontractors that will be needed to support the services of our company, and how this is all in the best interest of the island. You do some homework beforehand, find out if there's a tax structure or some fee basis for businesses to contribute to the overall health and welfare of the economic community on the island. That's the proposal you bring to the island in exchange for an opportunity to do business there. Charles Nesson: And the minister says, "Wonderful. I love it. I love it. My wife is a fan of Michael Jordan." And the Bulls are going to meet the Knicks in New York next week. Would you invite the minister and his family back to the United States? Keith Darcy: If there was a need for some legitimate business back in New York, there would be a basis to encourage a meeting. If there was no legitimate business need, then there would be no need to invite the minister and his wife. Charles Nesson: Now, wait a minute. If there was no need for legitimate business, then you wouldn't invite him. We're talking about a minister who has given you a big hint that he would love to have his wife and family invited to the United States, wined and dined, and taken to see Michael Jordan play basketball. You can't find a reason? You're not going to be looking for one? Eugene Herbert: I would hope that the Xanadu government has a budget to support his trip to the United States and be able to pay for a basketball ticket. Keith Darcy: I'm not so certain that there would be anything wrong in honoring the minister's request for a trip to New York. In view of the fact that we're going to make a substantial investment in the plant, in view of the fact we're going to start a new relationship, there would be a sound business reason to bring the minister to meet and understand the company with whom he could be doing business. And I would see nothing wrong either if that included giving him tickets to go see a basketball game. Probably have season tickets just for that purpose, anyway. Verne Henderson: It seems to me that there's some question here about the motives of our minister. The building of a relationship comes before making a deal with Asians. So if you're building a relationship, you don't have to have a promise of a contract, the relationship comes first. So is he building a relationship in the typical Asian style or is he asking for a bribe? If he is asking for a bribe, then I would be worried about doing business with him. Keith Darcy: We need to be clear-minded about what the local customs are, but we also need to be clear regarding our own intentions. If a relationship is important to some long-term development, there may be a basis for a relationship. If our intention is to pay consideration in order to satisfy what may be an illegal whim of somebody who is corrupt, then we ought to be clear-minded about our intention and act accordingly. Charles Nesson: OK, you've done the research-this is a country where bribes are paid. And you've made a business judgment that it's a fabulous place. Plus, the bribes aren't that big; they're not outrageous in size. Will you do business in that country? Keith Darcy: Well, there's Italy, Japan-name the country where bribes are not paid-including the United States. Having said that, if our research showed that this person participated in the process of corruption, then we wouldn't do business with him. But if we felt that the individual was not a participant in that system but was actively looking to clean it up, then maybe we would consider otherwise. Paul Robert: Can we cut to the chase here? What we're talking about is probably a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. We're not going to pay a bribe. Charles Nesson: The suggestion came up earlier about the local partner, the local agent. A guy in Xanadu who holds himself out as an expediter. He's called a business ethicist. And for $150,000, he will expedite this deal. The local agent says, "All I want is a check. You give me the check." What do you think? Barbara Pope: If I didn't understand what the check was being made for, what services I was buying, then I wouldn't give him the check. If I'm a corporation with a moral statement that talks about how we do business as a corporation, regardless of whether it's in the United States or in any country, that talks about not paying bribes, then we have to step back and look at The New York Times test-how will our actions look on the front page. Charles Nesson: Ms. Pope, you're the ethics officer back in the United States. The expediter suggests you pay $100,000 to the Xanadu Disaster Relief Fund. It's a charitable contribution to a lot of people in Xanadu. It looks good in The New York Times. That's your test, isn't it? Barbara Pope: If it's a legit nonprofit, it may be in our best interest to do something that helps build a relationship with the country. But I would certainly check it out first. Charles Nesson: So am I hearing it from everyone here that we will not use local agents unless we pin down exactly how they get their job done? Michael Rion: For heaven's sake, a lot of people in this country buy access to the political system through lobbyists. And I don't know how different that is from what we're talking about in other countries. In another culture there may be activities and payments that, in the context of people in that culture, are not seen as bribes but as part of the facilitation process. But they're at a scale or a mode that wouldn't be consistent with our values. And yet I don't think we would call them bribes. It's in some kind of gray area in between. That's when we do use agents. The difficult question you face is how much do you really want to know about those details? Frankly, the less you know, as I understand it, the better off you are with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, because you're not held responsible if you don't know exactly what they're doing. Paul Robert: Now you're talking ethics. Now you've got a problem. If you say there's something you don't want to know, and you want to close your eyes to it, you've got an ethical problem. Charles Nesson: Mr. Redgate, you're the ethics officer back in the United States, and this deal has gone through. You've gotten the approval from the minister. A report comes from Herbert's team: "We've got it. Our local agent was a miracle man." Do your antennae go up? Bill Redgate: If the report gives me reason to believe that something may have occurred that was inconsistent with what we believed in and what the law is, I would probe. I'd find out more about what we received in return for that payment. Charles Nesson: I'd really like to understand your job. Twenty years ago I never knew what a company ethics VP was. That's a new thing on the scene. Do you actually want to dig in and get all the details of all the transactions of whatever the company does in this country and across the world? Bill Redgate: No, I don't think a professional ethics officer should function as the police force of the organization. The ethics officer should make certain that the company's principles and philosophy and values are understood by the right people and facilitate in giving advice. If presented with reason to believe that something's wrong, then the obligation rests with the ethics officer to get the facts. But not to be involved with every decision and action that each manager in the company makes. Charles Nesson: So when Mr. Rion says, "Well, there're some things we'd rather not know; we got a local agent who did the job," everything is appropriate. If we ask this guy, "How did you do it?" He'd say, "That's my trade secret. I don't want to tell you.". Bill Redgate: If I have reason to believe that there are things going on that are intentionally being kept from me, I would certainly probe further. Barbara Pope: I want to disagree just a little bit. As the ethics officer in my organization, my marching orders from my CEO are that he or she absolutely wants to know when my antennae is up. And I would only be the ethics officer if my CEO said, "I want to know if you have the slightest question about anything going on that is unethical.". Charles Nesson: I'm Mark Megabyte, and you're going to inform me of your concerns. Are you going to write me a memo? Barbara Pope: No, I'm going to go in one-on-one. Charles Nesson: One-on-one so it's not discoverable. Would it be a disaster if you wrote him a memo? Barbara Pope: It might be. Particularly if I don't have my facts. We're not talking about noncompliance with statutes at this point; we're talking about some of the gray areas that to our corporation are very important. All I'm stating is that I don't know what's wrong, I don't know if anything is wrong. But I am suspicious. Paul Robert: But I agree with Michael too, that it's not practical to know everything. There are proprietary things that you don't need to know. And especially if you're dealing with an Asian, there are a lot of things that are private for them. Barbara Pope: Just to be clear on this, you do need to contact corporate counsel and get them involved, because you are liable for the actions of your agents, and there is a provision in the Foreign Practices Act that says you need to have a fairly good understanding of what those fees are for. Being ignorant of how your agents are spending your money is not an excuse and could get you into some trouble. Charles Nesson: You've got to be sophisticated about being ignorant. Barbara Pope: Precisely. Charles Nesson: You've got to have a reasonably good idea of what the local agent is doing. And if in your reasonably good idea you don't see anything, you're OK. Barbara Pope: Do you have to investigate your agents in every country and how they're spending every dollar and every dime? Probably not. Charles Nesson: All right, congratulations, you got the approval from the minister. And the government has got a perfect location for your new plant that they want to lease to you. It's beautiful. It's near travel routes, it's on a waterway, cheap power supply, and workers aplenty. And you, Mr. Herbert, go with your local agent and the minister to inspect this location. It is perfect except for one thing. There's a village on the site. It's not a big village, but there are people who do subsistence farming and a little fishing in the river. The minister says, "We will lease you this property, and in six months this place will be clear. We'll take excellent care of the villagers. We're going to relocate them." What do you say? Eugene Herbert: You can't assume a government can't be trusted. It's insulting to the government of Xanadu to suggest that. Now, if we've had research that shows they're despotic and they treat their people harshly, maybe we shouldn't be there. But we are. So I'd say, "I hope that what we're paying will assist in the relocation process so that these people can continue to engage in their livelihood." I'd like to have a conversation regarding the welfare of the villagers. Charles Nesson: "Fine. The payment will be more than sufficient for us to take care of relocation. You come back here in six months with your architectural plans, you can build away.". Ron Berenbeim: I see a problem, because the relocation of the local citizens could be a very severe public-relations problem. I think you really have to get into the details. Charles Nesson: They don't have public relations problems in Xanadu. Ron Berenbeim: But we do in the United States. We have people monitoring our activities and relationships in foreign countries. Charles Nesson: You don't sound to me like you're talking ethics here. You're talking pure, what's-on-the-right-hand column of The Wall Street Journal. Bill Redgate: If I were Omnitech's ethics officer and had proclaimed commitment to certain values that included how they treated individuals, I'd be bothered if I had some reason to believe that they may not be taking care of their people. I would insist on knowing more. Charles Nesson: Omnitech's lawyers review the situation and conclude it's legal. "I don't know exactly what's going to happen," they say, "but whatever it is that's going to happen we're not doing it. And the Xanadu government has got the jurisdiction to do it, so what we're doing is legal.". Bill Redgate: This makes me nervous, because it sounds like the scenario of Bhopal, India, and Union Carbide. In fact, Union Carbide tried to get the local people together to talk about the plant before it was established. Even after they had done that, the natives moved in and surrounded the plant against the wishes of the government and the American company, and it was beyond control, legally or politically. Michael Rion: I would argue that Omnitech has a moral obligation to ensure that the villagers are handled properly. And I would make that argument for this reason: It would be one thing if we were driving through town on the way to the site, and the minister pointed out all these villagers who were going to relocate. That has nothing to do with our action. But this relocation is a direct result of our activity; we are partly responsible for whatever happens to those villagers. Charles Nesson: What if the government showed you the same site-we can play with the facts a little bit-the same site, absolutely beautiful, and there used to be a village on it, but the government had it cleared two months ago. Bill Redgate: I think you're morally responsible when you can reasonably anticipate the facts. If I felt that this was directly connected to our access to this site, I'd still have some concern about it. But it gets more gray at that point. Joan Dubinsky: Business is about solving problems. If Keith comes and says, "All right, these villagers were moved out," we say, well, where have those people gone? Where are they? Part of the business-solving capacity is to say that if we've got a plant and we've got a lease, we need workers. Where are those workers? Perhaps one of our company values is to have employment at a fair rate. Could those villagers-though they've been displaced by the government-now come to work for us? Paul Robert: I agree completely. I think many of us as ethics officers often say that good ethical decisions are good business decisions. This is the opportunity to prove that. Why would we even consider not asking what's going to happen to the villagers? Ultimately they're going to be our source of labor. And if they're mad at us, that can do away with 50 to 100 years' worth of goodwill. Charles Nesson: Now, Mr. Herbert was worried that you were going to insult the minister if you start digging too much about what's going to be done with these villagers. That's not a problem for you. Paul Robert: I think that the explanation to the minister is we are here for business reasons. As a result, when we raise the tide, all of the boats go up in his country. We're not doing this to meddle in his affairs-we're doing this because we have a legitimate business reason to make sure this succeeds. Charles Nesson: All right, I'll tell you what's happened here: We've inquired; we've made arrangements; we're going to sit down and have tea with the villagers; we've figured out a beautiful relocation plan for them; it's all terrific. This deal is just about set. Mark Megabyte is going to be so happy, it's unbelievable. We've got one more piece to put in place. The major buyer of our product in Xanadu is Happy Day Industries. We're about to close a contract with them that will put the operations of our new plant into the black right from the start. All we've got to do is ink the deal with H.P. Day, Happy himself, who runs Happy Day Industries. Your intelligence on Happy leads you to think that he is a, shall we say, a gentleman of Xanadu's old school-he's uncomfortable talking business with ladies. And Ms. Pope has been part of this team all along. The question, Mr. Herbert, does she go with the team to the signing? Eugene Herbert: Does she want to go to this thing? She's welcome to go, and I'll certainly support her going, because I don't buy this gender-discrimination attitude of the Xanaduans. On the other hand, they do have this attitude. And maybe it will change over a period of time, maybe it won't. Of course, I'll still support her if she goes, but if we blow the deal- Charles Nesson: You're fired. Eugene Herbert: If she's willing to carry the burden, she can come right ahead. She's always welcome. Barbara Pope: I think Gene's point is an important one: Does my corporation support me? As long as the company is behind me, and I know that Mark knows about my role, I don't need to be there for my ego. If I've been a team player throughout, do I make a point and blow the deal and my hard work? Lori Tansey: It helps to be asked. It's a lot better than to have the corporation decide for you and be told you're not going to participate. By the way, I don't think we have to put this in Xanadu-we could put this right here in the United States. Paul Robert: Where has Barbara been all this time during the course of the contract negotiations? If she's been at the table, then there's no question in my mind she deserves to be there at the table when the contract is signed. Charles Nesson: So there's a question of who deserves to be at the table. It's not a question of how we're going to get the deal closed, it's who deserves to be at the table. And if she deserves to be at the table, come hell or high water, she's going to be at the table even if the deal is lost. Paul Robert: I get paid to balance risks. If she's been there all along and it hasn't created a problem such to the point that we're ready to ink the deal now, I don't see how it's going to create a problem now. Bill Redgate: I'm concerned about the precedent that you may establish here. What if Barbara gets promoted to head of the region in which Xanadu is included? Does that mean in all future events Barbara is not going to be participating in any of the discussions with Happy? Keith Darcy: Also, after the next five meetings that you have with Happy, does Barbara feel comfortable that you're telling her 100 percent of everything that's going on in these wonderfully male-bonded relationships? Or does some mistrust begin to creep into your relationship with her, because it's just you and Happy going to the Knicks-Bulls games? Charles Nesson: Mr. Darcy, you insist on Barbara coming. And as you're being shown into Happy's office, Happy's first assistant says, "Is this woman your secretary?". Keith Darcy: "No, she isn't. She's a key executive who has helped negotiate this deal.". Charles Nesson: "Mr. Day only does business at the executive level with males. She's not welcome in his office.". Keith Darcy: "Our corporate resolution requires her presence and her signature on the contract. That's the only way we can do business.". Charles Nesson: "So sorry, Mr. Darcy." So that's it. You're gone. Keith Darcy: I'm gone. Michael Rion: It seems to me if you get into that situation you're a lousy, stupid manager not to have anticipated it. We should have assessed this ahead of time and judged those risks. We may not be talking only about Happy and his peculiar predilections; Happy may be typical of the culture. Then never mind whether Barbara comes to this meeting, can we run a plant in this country and do we have to treat women in a certain way? Those questions you've got to figure out long before you show up at the door. Now, you can make mistakes. You may end up in the situation you've described, and then you've got to decide what to do. But good managers would avoid that more often than not. Charles Nesson: Let's change the scenario a little. Just as the first assistant says, "So sorry, Mr. Darcy," the second assistant shows you in along with Ms. Pope. Happy says, "Miss Pope, would you sit over here right next to me?" You go forward with the presentation, and Ms. Pope presents some part of it. And Happy says, "How remarkable to have such a wonderful presentation from someone as beautiful and attractive as you." What do you do now, Mr. Darcy? Keith Darcy: I sit and wait. Charles Nesson: OK, Happy says, "It's a Xanadu tradition that when we close a deal we celebrate with a dinner with the outstanding negotiator. Will you have dinner with me at the Xanadu Industrial Club tonight, Miss Pope? Just the two of us." What do you do now, Mr. Darcy? Keith Darcy: That's Barbara's decision at this point. Barbara Pope: Yeah, it's my decision. And if I'm comfortable I can say yes, and if I'm not comfortable I can say no. Lori Tansey: She's right. I remember being at a conference and meeting somebody for 15 minutes and his saying, "We'll get together when you get to Stuttgart." However, I got a message to meet him at his house at 7:00 that same evening. My initial reaction was that I had met this man for 15 minutes at a conference and now he wanted me to come to his house? But it turned out it was perfectly legitimate. It's the woman's call to make. And in other cultures getting to know the person really is integral to the business and precedes the business relationship. Charles Nesson: So let's suppose that you go to dinner, and it's not turning out all right. What do you do about it? Barbara Pope: It's starting to head into dangerous territory, there's starting to be a lot of personal questions, that sort of thing? Charles Nesson: It's all of that. Barbara Pope: If that happens, then I'd find an excuse to say, "I need to go," and I exit the situation. I'd try to do it as gracefully as possible. Charles Nesson: Would you call the company ethicist? Barbara Pope: With a client? I'm not sure that I would. Charles Nesson: Would you speak to Mr. Darcy? He's the senior man on your team. Barbara Pope: I'd tell him what happened. Absolutely. Charles Nesson: What do you do, Mr. Darcy? Keith Darcy: I'd probably want to know more about the specifics, and I would like to find out how she feels. I would ask her if there is some additional course of action that she might like to take, either individually or collectively with the company. Eugene Herbert: This sounds a little intrusive, if you ask me. You may be snuffing out a budding romantic relationship by assuming too much. Barbara Pope: Not if I've gone to my boss or my partner. Charles Nesson: Well, Mr. Herbert's on to something here. Let's say-hypothetically-that you didn't resist Happy's intentions. Let's just say that you actually flirted a little bit with Happy. He has no compunctions. He's got toys and sports cars and trips to New York, all of the things that we were very cautious about giving. What do you do, Mr. Darcy, when it turns out that a female member of your team has, in fact, gone right along? Keith Darcy: There could be a personal relationship here. My guidance and counsel would be to be clear about where her business responsibilities are. Charles Nesson: This is a person who's on the team to get the job done. Mark Megabyte wanted this contract inked. She saw what it took to get the job done, and she did it. H.P. Day is a happy man. What do you do, Mr. Darcy? Keith Darcy: It might depend on what kind of information has been forthcoming to me from the woman in question. If she had a relationship and enjoyed it, that's a personal dimension. If somebody came to me and said, "You'll never guess what I did last night to get the business-" then, there may be something else that should be discussed. I'm not certain that I'd know what course of action I'd take. Bill Redgate: Assuming she was flirtatious and that helped the business relationship, if it was the first time, and that's all I heard, then I don't think I'd do a thing about it. If it was the 15th time, and if the facts that I had heard went beyond being a little flirtatious, then I'd talk to the person. Charles Nesson: We're being hypothetical, so I can play the role of this person. Talk to me. Bill Redgate: Let's assume this isn't the first time I've mentioned the issue to you, so it's been several occasions. I'd start by raising the point that we've discussed your behavior with customers before- Charles Nesson: The customers don't seem to object. This is the fifth deal I've closed. I'm known in the business as the closer, Mr. Redgate. Bill Redgate: If it went beyond flirtation- Charles Nesson: You bet it went beyond flirtation. Bill Redgate: If I knew that for a fact, I'd have a very serious conversation with the woman. If I knew it were true that the woman had gone beyond being flirtatious with a customer, I would have a serious discussion about it. Charles Nesson: There's a euphemism, "serious discussion.". Barbara Pope: I want to interject a second, because this is about company values. If you're at this point in closing a deal, and you've got a person who's got a track record, you've got a big problem. It's bigger than this specific issue. It's way too far along, because you're in very dangerous territory. But it's back to the point of what are the company's values-forget the rules; she's broken no rules. This is well beyond good management and good leadership. You've let this happen, so you're responsible. It's a little different if it's a consensual relationship or there's a relationship building. But is the relationship separate from the business? You're back to whether you're an ethical corporation. Bill Redgate: It doesn't have anything to do with being an ethical corporation or corporate values. It has to do with your relationship with the person as a member of the team. I'm not going to look at you in the same way if I know you slept with Happy. It's as simple as that because there will be dual loyalties. Barbara Pope: But what is the corporation's expectations of my behavior? How am I supposed to act? Alas, we'll never know how our hypothetical woman executive dealt with the dilemma of Happy Day. Time ended for this panel discussion before the participants could guide our heroine to an ethical line of behavior, leaving her on her own with Happy. Think of it as the business version of Pauline being tied to the railroad tracks, helpless as the locomotive charges toward her.... |
| FirstSearch®
Copyright © 1992-2001 OCLC
as to electronic presentation and platform. E-mail address: FirstSearch@oclc.org Location: http://FirstSearch.oclc.org |
|