Jeetendra Karki (ITS 360)
Assignment: p75-79, Answer any two questions of “What would you do?” and answer Critical thinking questions of Two Cases.
What would you do Questions:
Answer1: Me a CPA found that the CFO initiated and approved three non-payroll checks totaling $10,500 to an organization employee for her son rehabilitation which was promised to be paid back over time and now by following the five-steps-decision making process is as follows:
1. Defining the problem: The problem is that the CFO initiated a loaned the money to an employee who’s been working there for 15 years for her son drug addiction rehab issue. It's not just only that, payroll was approved and that’s a loss in the organization. This is a straight violation of position/power and rule. You’re not supposed to do that as once you do thin then you can do this again and again.
2. Identifying alternatives: The solution could have been simple, she could have raised a fund raising for the employee for financial support throughout the company and close friend or even could have helped her personally some money instead of initiating a loan from the organization.
3. Choosing the alternative: She could have chosen to help her personally with her own money or helped her to find a bank to get the loan out for her son.
4. Implementing the Decision: I would put the record in the audit report because the rule has been violated and giving someone a payroll check to make it a loan is something that shouldn’t have done, it is like giving someone money and later forgetting about it.
5. Evaluation: This is a blunder mistake from the CFO side and a very poor/unethical decision that she made to help her in the wrong way by going against the policy and keeping between them. This can be termed fraud and can have serious consequences to CFO position.
Answer2: When it comes to resume and selecting candidates, it is a very hard and thoroughly thoughtful choice that needs to be made. However, my concerns about possible resume inflation and the heavy emphasis on certification versus experience can be done by following the five-steps-decision making process is as follows:
6. Defining the problem: The problem is selecting the finalist with least experience, but with Cisco certificate or the finalist with more experience, but with no Cisco certificate.
7. Identifying alternatives: The alternatives are either I can go with the candidate with the certificate that is being asked for the Cisco network specialist or I can go with the candidate that has worked over 5 years in this field.
8. Choosing the alternative: I will be choosing the candidate with at least experience that is about three years or experience and with the Cisco certificate as this is what was told to me and is required in the company.
9. Implementing the decision: Replying to the people who are not selected for the last interview process is definitely hard and must be sent in a way that they should apply for more and we are currently seeking people with the certificate and experience which they already have.
10. Evaluation: I think this is the right thing to do, to filter the candidate and select the one who has both skills, experience, moral, and the required Cisco certificate for a position as a Cisco Network specialist.
Critical Thinking Questions of two cases:
Case 1: Bridgestone versus IBM
Answer1: Each side could’ve worked together while the software was in the development phase. IBM could’ve have talked with Bridgestone about the needs and clear project requirement with people to talk to anytime for a smooth development. On the other hand, Bridgestone could have stayed up to date with IBM work and shouldn’t have sent the software to live until the testing and bugs were fixed.
Answer2: IBM company’s reputation was harmed more by the publicity surrounding this project because it sounds like they failed to complete the project on time, Bridgestone at the same time filed suit against IBM for faulty software and this escalated the news showing that IBM lacks skills and personnel.
Answer3: According to the latest research online, just one week before jury selection was slated to begin, Bridgestone and IBM filed a motion to drop their lawsuits against each other with prejudice, meaning that the suit can never be raised again. Court documents show that each firm agreed to pay their own attorney fees. It was not clear from the filing if any specific monetary concessions were made by either firm. This has been a long and acrimonious journey for both firms.
Case 2: SAP found in violation of FCPA
Answer1: Yes, I think the penalty for violation of the internal control provision and the books and records provision of the FCPA is enough to motivate the companies to carry out a system capable of detecting bribes. Yes, it is possible that some organizations tolerated lax internal control, so managers have as much freedom as possible in running their business as this will give them enough space and trust with the freedom to run the business and play with the system. The changes that I would suggest to FCPA is that they should make it mandatory that the companies develop and carry out a system for bribes detection and has a routine check to catch the fraud.
Answer2: If the software lacks good internal control then the company should be contacted and even can be filed a suit against the false software with lacking internal control at a standard level. This can not only create loopholes in the company but also can be an easy target for a hacker.
Answer3: The IT worker should collaborate with the company more and with the software company during the time of development so that they will have good internal control in the software that tracks all the receipt and payments on what’s going on there, who is doing what and other suppliers, employee receipts and work. When the design is created with scenarios and possibilities of loophole then the loophole can be avoided for proper software development with the help of Software Company.