Pema Lama


1.You are a recent new hire at your company and have been given the responsibility for soliciting the employees in your 10-person department for the company’s annual drive to support United Way (a national nonprofit organization that works with a coalition of volunteers, contributors, and local charities to help people in their own communities). Your company sets “giving goals” based on each employee’s annual salary. You have completed your initial solicitation of your coworkers, and several of them declined to contribute, while others have pledged amounts well under their “giving goal.” As a result, your department is a few thousand dollars short of its goal. You have a meeting this afternoon with the senior vice president responsible for the company’s United Way program. You are concerned that you may be pressured to resolicit and encourage under contributors to pledge more. Do you think that this is a fair request? How would you respond if such pressure were applied to you?


I think encouraging and convincing other employee through good and polite way is fair request. However we cannot pressure them or any other action that they might feel offensive. If I were in this situation I would communicate with other employee who do not want to contribute and encourage them to participate. I would explain them the positive response and benefit of doing such things.



2.  You are currently being considered for a major promotion within your company to vice president of marketing. In your current position as manager of advertising, you supervise 15 managers and 10 hourly workers. As part of the annual salary review process, you have been given the flexibility to grant your employees an average 3 percent annual salary increase; however, you are strongly considering a lower amount. This would ensure that your department’s expenses stay under budget and would send the message that you are able to control costs. How would you proceed?


In this case, there would be two situations that I would be looking at. First I would see how important it is to maintain expenses under budget and second thing how long the employees have not received 3 percent annual salary increase. Then I would compare with first and second situation and whichever I think it is more important I would precede that. For example, lets say there was increased in 3 percent annual salary last year and this year we increase again and if our budget go negative or under company annual target then would cancel 3 percent annual salary increase for employees this year.



Cases 1: IBM a front-runner in sustainability.


Discussion Questions


  1. 1. Present three strong arguments that IBM might have used to justify the start of its sustain- ability programs in the 1970s.


a) IBM incrementally reduced toxic waste by 220,500 tons from 1987 to 2011.

b) IBM worked to reduce its use of ozone depleting chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons. The company reduced gas emissions in 2011 by 3.2 percent.

c) In 2011 IBM spent 114.5 million on its environmental initiatives.




  1. What major goals has IBM achieved in environmental stewardship?


IBM works with International Organization for standardization to create international standards for toxic and nontoxic waste reduction, water purification, efficient energy and waste emission. It helped ISO to develop a specific standard and also became the first company to demonstrate compliance with that standard. I think able to get chance to make standard for other organization is one of the best achievement for IBM.


  1. How might IBM leverage its leadership in sustainability to maintain its competitiveness in the IT market?


         IBM practice of meeting sustainability standard help IBM maintain market share because the European union, the united states, and other countries give preference in awarding contracts to companies that have ISO certification.  The company has found the corporate responsibility has given it a better bottom line.

Since people have positive reviews about the IBM, the chances of staying firm in the market are high.



Case2: Ethical and Business setbacks for Nokia


Discussion Questions

  1. Were Nokia’s leaders acting unethically when they moved their facilities from Germany to Romania and from Romania to Asia, or was this a legitimate business decision to reduce costs and improve profits? How does this decision compare with Nokia’s actions in Iran?


Nokia leaders are not acting unethically when they moved their facilities to reduce cost and improve profits. I think it is legitimate business decision to reduce cost. However, Nokia actions in Iran are unethically because they are tracking and intercepting the Internet communications of the Iranian citizens and taken away freedom from Iranian people. Helping government to intercept the Internet communication of Iranian citizens is like snatching their freedom of speech, freedom of share information and personal privacy. It is violation of basic human right.


  1. Why did Nokia’s customer base in Europe and Iran react to the company’s decisions by withdrawing patronage? Do customers always respond to unethical decisions in this way?


Since there was no more service facility from Nokia in Germany and also they betray those employees for job, customers react to the company decision. In Iran, Nokia was involving in unethical work therefore they customer react there.

Yes, customers do respond for unethical decision but everyone has different response. Some customer may stop using their product and services while other protest.


     3. How difficult is it to ensure ethical decision making in a business that is organized as a “network of equals”? How does this impact accountability? Does this explain why Nokia kept the investigation secret?


I think it is extremely difficult to ensure ethical decision making in a business that is organized as a “network of equal” because every people has different views and ideas. Making ethical decision inappropriate can have great negative impact for company and it can also bring the company completely shut down. It may be the reason for Nokia to kept the investigation secret.