Ethical And Legal Consequences Of Being Blurred

During my courses, I frequently remind students that most corporate executives, accountants, and auditors are honest and ethical. This case provides a stark and powerful example of one such individual. When I discuss a case such as this in my courses, I try to provide other examples of positive role models among corporate executives. Granted, most of these examples do not involve accounting or auditing matters, but, nevertheless, they help to blunt the impression that students may receive from studying my cases that most corporate executives are “crooks.”

The fact that the insider trading charges were thrown out, but the conspiracy charges stuck is curious. It appears, yet again, the judicial process and mainstream social construct of acceptable behavior collided with what Martha, her broker, and fellow investor touted as ‘nothing wrong’. Knowing more of John Savarrese’s role as Martha’s pretrial counsel, gives two more important points about Martha’s case of white collar crime. The first is questionable ethics and the other is arrogance. Mr. Savarrese has been criticized by legal analysts for not providing ethical legal advice to Martha or making the right professional choices himself. The belief is that Savarrese knew or at least suspected, Martha and Bacanovic planned to perjure themselves. As Martha’s legal counselor it was ethically negligent of Savarrese not to advise Martha of the legal repercussions of lying to the SEC. If Martha insisted on presenting her fraudulent story, Savarrese should have immediately withdrawn as her counsel (Hoffman, 2007). More importantly than if Savarrese knew or not, in her arrogance, Martha never thought this issue of a mere $45, 637 would develop into charges nor a prison sentence! She was simply above the laws and saw no reason to tell the

Next, intelligence occurs by organizing and reviewing information pertaining to the conflicting situation, amidst identifying conflicting values (Ethics Game, n.d). Ethical lenses guide beliefs of the individual, and personally I am a combination of rights and responsibility, and the results lens. As a result, rationality and autonomy are the values that take precedence during a moral conflict. My value

Usually, most corporate espionage schemes are conducted by business insiders or people who have legitimate access to a company’s computer networks, for example, employees, information technology personnel, or corporate executives. Mostly, such schemes are carried out by these insiders, whose motivations might be lack of loyalty or job dissatisfaction.

In the past few years, enterprise integrity has come up on a regular subject of conversation. In the past ten years only, we have seen numerous situations associated with collaborative scams which have shaken the people 's trust in businesses and also the general economic climate. A few of the many salient frauds are the WorldCom and Enron 's scams, the ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff 's, the latest accusations of Goldman Sachs tricking option traders to guarantee the company 's personal profit. Incidents such as these designed us all, as upcoming corporation professionals as well as market leaders, think about ethics and its particular function in the commercial world (Gross, 2010.)

In this case we are introduced to Eve DuPlacie, an information technology professional working for Orange Company. Orange company is a huge corporation who produces wireless mobile device, and rivals her previous telecommunications employer Banana Company. Eve has found herself in an ethical dilemma of whether or not to provide her new employer with trade secrets that she is contractually obligated not to disclose by her previous employer. Her new employment contract with Orange obliges her to utilize all her skills and knowledge of the industry to help improve Orange’s products; however, her previous employment contract at Banana contained a clause requiring her not to disclose any of their commercial information for a year after her contract ended. She is obliged by her current employer to disclose the trade secrets, and obliged not to disclose them by her previous employer. Seeing as how there are no others in the case who would influence Eve’s decision, Eve is the only one morally responsible for deciding where her loyalties lie. While there are factors within the case from both perspectives that perhaps could influence her decision, Eve is still the only person responsible for her course of action.

G., Perri, F. S., & Van Buren, H. J. (2015). Further Beyond the Basic Background Check: Predicting Future Unethical Behavior. Business & Society Review (00453609), 120(4), 549-576.

In this case Jake Markos is the moral agent and is contemplating on whether or not he should embed spyware into the Diabetes Foundation website that allows his company, ALAC marketing, to collet email addresses and use them to market a product. Other moral agents presented in this case are Nathan Brook, Jake’s boss, Maia Herrick, Nathan’s assistant manager, and ALAC Marketing. In this case, ALAC is the least important moral agent because it possess vicarious moral sensitivity and responsiveness thus, if we examine the sensitivity and responsiveness of its individual employees we would understand ALAC’s position regarding Jake’s dilemma. This is also, in part, due to the fact that corporations employ highly organized holistic decision-making and although corporations are morally accountable it does not mean that individuals who are employed by the corporation are not also morally accountable.

The case study that was analyzed is, “Unauthorized Disclosure: Hewlett-Packard’s secret Surveillance of Directors and Journalists,” by Anne T. Lawrence, Randal D. Harris, and Sally Baack. The ethical issues presented through the case deal with Hewlett-Packard Company (HP). HP is a major international company in the computer and technology market. The company describes itself as a “technology solutions provider to consumers, business and institutions globally.” Their credo is called “HP way”, which focuses on points such as trust and respect for individuals, high level of achievement and contribution, business conduct with uncompromising integrity, objectives through teamwork, and encouragement of flexibility and innovation (Newman). The problems faced by HP’s board of directors were a lack of accountability with HP’s credo. If the “HP way” was followed by them, these ethical issues would be avoided. It also promotes a bad example by the high-level of management of this globally powerful organization.

The Dodd-Frank Act has allowed for more leniency when it comes to whistleblowing but this legislation was implemented after this story began. There are several industry protection programs for whistleblowers and the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) even promotes whistleblowing by giving out monetary rewards for certain cases. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was supposed to make whistleblowers believe that they would not be retaliated against. However, making the determination of whistleblowing after hearing Tony Menendez’s story will make the weak squeamish and the strong possibly reconsider.

This result in a conflict between the culture of competition and ethical standards however, corporations are not like humans they are artificial legal entities with perpetual life chartered by the government for their existence (Nadar, 2004; pg 8). Corporations have achieved a status where they have all constitutional rights that people have except the right against self-incrimination. Corporations engage in criminal activites on a number of different levels that harm and affect the general public however, the public for the most part remains unaware of these activites because these elites invest in hiding the truth which thereby renders their actions invisible.

This paper relies on secondary data on a past phenomenon. It combines data from journal and other internet sources to bring out aspects of unethical behavior by Adelphia's top executive. The analysis of data takes two ethical frameworks.

I assert that for a moral system to be necessary and applicable, there must exist a moral agent who possesses both the desire and the ability to choose. By denoting certain actions or ways of being as better, a moral system implies that there are also other potential actions and ways of being that are worse. The individual must choose between them. Without this element of choice, an action has no moral qualification. For example, a computer acts, but it does not choose its action. Consequently, while a computer can be judged better or worse in its ability to carry out an action, it cannot be judged responsible for the action. Rather, the person who uses or creates the computer is in fact responsible, for it is that person who chooses for it to act in a particular way. In a moral system, choice, responsibility, and the viability of judgment are linked inextricably.

Companies in today’s society are often required to abide by an abundant amount of rules and regulations imposed upon them which stem from government and law enforcement authority. In analyzing the Case of “The Reluctant Security Guard” we will examine the decision making process which led to David Tuff effectively ‘whistle blowing’ for what he felt was the right thing to do.

As the turn of the 21st Century evolved, it appeared as if Adelphia Communications Corporation was on a direct path of success; unbeknownst to their investors and the public, they were in reality on a direct path of destruction instead. Unfortunately, Adelphia is not the first major company in the history of the United States’ business world to lose the trust of the American public, but it is certainly one of the most notable ones to do so. As the events surrounding the Adelphia scandal unfolded in full view of the public eye, a multitude of media outlets were there to broadcast the destruction and distrust to the masses leaving many wondering if the term “business ethics” was actually nothing more than just an oxymoron. Throughout this