Case study based on Professional Ethics
You make some good points (see below in italic) about the company having some duty to their US employees.
- What about the company’s duty as a fiduciary to the shareholders of the company’s stock?
- If they could increase stock prices in the long run and lower overall costs of their products for consumers, does this change the analysis?
- What is the balance that companies should make when considering all of these variables?
I believe that company A should keep all positions in the United States. Company A is making a profit with their current operation methods and the only benefit would be to increase the company’s profits. The employees that would lose their position due to the outsourcing would create a hardship on them personally and effect the economy. Company A owes it to the workers and to the US.
SAMPLE ANSWER: Strictly speaking, the company (directors and officers) is responsible to its owners – the shareholders of its stock. In this respect, the profit motive aspect of the company is brought into the forefront. Higher revenues lead to better profits which in turn boost investor confidence in
the company’s stock.
Do you think that the ethical expectations of companies change based on what is excepted in a culture? Does a company operating in Europe have a different standard based on the culture there than we would here in the US? Since we know that regulations vary by country and the laws are a representation of the culture can we apply that to the ethical practices of companies? Ethical for a Chinese company could be considered unethical in say Germany, what are your thoughts?
For access on complete solution towards the above question email: firstname.lastname@example.org or chat with us live.