What are some of the critical ethical challenges to firms competing in the global economy?

**must write in own words – most answers provided – no plagiarism, please

Answer the following questions after studying the Week 1’s content:

  1. Business success is often tied to effectively managed strategies. Using the Internet, study Starbuck’s current performance. Based on analysis, do you judge Starbucks to be a success? Why or why not?
  2. Think of an industry in which you want to work. In your opinion, which of the three primary stakeholder groups is the most powerful in that industry today? Why? Which do you expect to be the most powerful group in five years? Why?
  3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “I think managers have little responsibility for the failure of business firms.” Justify your view.
  4. Do vision and mission have any meaning in your personal life? If so, describe it. Are your current actions being guided by a vision and mission? If not, why not?
  5. Can a firm achieve a competitive advantage and, thereby, strategic competitiveness without acting ethically? Explain.Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases: Competitiveness and Globalization , 13th Edition

     

    Answer the following questions after studying the Week 1’s content:

    1. Business success is often tied to effectively managed strategies. Using the Internet, study Starbuck’s current performance. Based on analysis, do you judge Starbucks to be a success? Why or why not?.

    Starbucks Corporation is an American organization that manages espresso, serving hot and cold beverages, miniature ground moment espresso, entire bean espresso, full and free leaf teas, drinks, and a few bites (Moore, 2012). The Chain was established in the year 1971 and it works 23, 450 areas across the reality where the larger part is in the United States. This makes it the most mainstream Coffee Company and café chain on the planet. The solid and notable brand name permits Starbucks to keep up its high edges concerning the general benefits and permits it to raise costs when important.

     

    The examination of the organization’s deals and extension patterns shows enormous development. In the year 1984, the first proprietors of Starbucks, drove by Baldwin, bought Peet’s. During this period, the absolute deals of espresso in the US were diminishing, yet the deals of claim to fame espresso were expanding, coming about in a 10% of the market continuously 1989 (Herbold, 2013). The organization worked in just six stores in Seattle continuously in 1986 and had recently started to sell coffee espresso. At the hour of the organization’s first sale of stock on the securities exchange, which was in June 1992, it had 140 sources, with an approximated income of 73.5 million US dollars, up from 1.3 million US dollars in the year 1987. The development of Starbucks has been rising dramatically. By August 2015, the organization had opened stores in Williamsburg, Ho Chi Minh among numerous different urban areas and had made declarations that it would before long enter.

     

     

    Combodia and Italy 99000 940cd 18000 16oca 14000 12cco Stores loooo 8000 boco 4000 2000 1977 1974 1977 1986 1983 1986 1989 19

     

    Starbucks ‘ current execution shows that it has the stuff to pass on the strong turn of events. Through my eyes, Starbucks offers an unprecedented outline of how effectively administered systems achieve business accomplishment. The chain diners appear like it is any place in strip malls and on city streets, even though I think there is room left for extra improvements (Franta, Fluhrer, Keiter, Myers, and Feinberg, 2015).

     

    Anybody feeling that Starbucks isn’t productive should look at the store improvement in different bits of the world, particularly China to see how the accompanying massive advancement stage is starting. India, which is straightforwardly on China’s doorsteps with more than 1 billion people, offers another huge opportunity to be created. Estimations show that there are 70 Starbucks stores in the entire Republic of India, and the Teavana chain can similarly acquire immense ground in a nation for its tea (Herbold, 2013).

     

    There is adequately clear to legitimize my dispute that Starbucks is a victory. In any case, there are such incalculable overall possibilities, particularly in China and India, offering the extraordinary potential to pass on basically on Starbucks advancement. In China, for example, there are 750 stores opened simply inside the latest year. Also, the compelling flexible mentioning a portion application as of now speaks to 20% of the solicitation made, and this is driving the rollout of the coffee movement organizations (Franta, Fluhrer, Keiter, Myers, and Feinberg, 2015).

     

    Looking at the most recent things in the show of Starbucks. New monetary experts have a for the most part fantastic chance of a solid profit for the remote possibility that they purchase the quality stock surmising that future accomplishment is throughout managed. Whatever endless people have gotten a basic stock tip in the wake of having been to the bistros and taken advantage of their tea. A bit of those customer has become long stretch speculators. In particular, the strong and striking brand name grants Starbucks to keep up its high edges concerning the overall advantages and allows it to raise costs when crucial.

     

    Considering, this paper saw that Starbucks’ advancement to new business areas and things have been a victory. With the various diverse business areas that it is as of now starting by then, it is obvious that the Company will have the choice to keep up its high accomplishment even later on.

     

    2. Think of an industry in which you want to work. In your opinion, which of the three primary stakeholder groups is the most powerful in that industry today? Why? Which do you expect to be the most powerful group in five years? Why?

    3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “I think managers have little responsibility for the failure of business firms.” Justify your view.

    I disagree with the statement, “I think managers have little responsibility for the failure of business firms.” Because, management is the biggest support system for the entire organisation for bringing success. Managers have more responsibility for the failure of the business organisation, as they are the authorised and powerful people, who manage, control and use the important resources that are important for a company to attain it’s goals.

     

    Managers play many roles in the firm, viz, facilitator, motivator, organiser, leader, director, guide, controller, and many more. They can really being greater profitability to the firm by optimising the use of resources and guiding the employees in a proper direction. Thus, they have a huge responsibility for the firm’s success as well as it’s failure.

    Managers are primarily responsible for the failure of business firms. One should agree with this statement. Although some factors are beyond the controls of a manager, however he can save the company during such period.

     

    Managers are responsible for the failure of firms as they fail to modify the company strategy as per the changes in external environment. A manager is responsible to lay down the policies and strategies of a firm. An effective manager needs to continuously review the company’s policies and practices to identify the required changes. It would help the company to maintain long-term competitiveness in the market. The main failure behind a company’s failure includes lack of character and vision of the manager. Some examples are given below:

    Daniel Bouton, Chairman of Société Générale: His risk taking behavior along with lesser internal control led to $7 billion losses for his company.

    Lack of vision and control of James Cayne the former CEO of Bears Stearns led to the collapse of the company.

    Strategic control refers to the overall control in the policies and practices of a business firm. Contrary to this, the financial control only deals with the assets and liabilities of the business firm.

     

     

     

    4. Do vision and mission have any meaning in your personal life? If so, describe it. Are your current actions being guided by a vision and mission? If not, why not?

     

    5. Can a firm achieve a competitive advantage and, thereby, strategic competitiveness without acting ethically? Explain.

     

    No, in my opinion, a firm cannot achieve a competitive advantage and, thereby, strategic competitiveness without acting ethically. Competitive advantage is a position that is being established by offering a better quality of goods and services to the consumers in comparison to that of competitors. This is the most important factor that allows companies to achieve increased sales volume and profit margins. Strategic competitiveness is a similar factor that describes that a firm wants to achieve its goal even in the presence of competition in the market.

    Being ethical means conducting business operations in such a way that no individual is getting harm and treated fairly, there is a rational use of resources and there is no such practice that can hurt the goodwill of the company. A company that wants to establish a competitive advantage and strategic competitiveness should act ethically and if it does not, it will go down soon. When a company fulfills ethical responsibilities, its image appears superior in the market which helps in establishing a competitive advantage outside the firm and strategic competitiveness inside the firm.

     

    6. What are some of the critical ethical challenges to firms competing in the global economy?

    When a firm competes in a global economy, it faces several critical ethical challenges. A business should take into consideration the legal and ethical issues to gain success in the competitive environment. The common ethical challenges that the global firms face are:

    – Workplace diversity- The international business gives rise to diversity in the workplace. There are lot of ethical issues in recruiting, selecting and hiring the diverse sector in a global economy.

    – Equal opportunity and employment for all- This is one of the common ethical challenges by international business as it requires equal employment opportunities for all to avoid any biases.

    – Trust and reputation – In order to maintain trust and reputation, the global company might face ethical challenges such as ethical dilemma in their business.

    – Working conditions and standards- Sometimes the global companies maintain poor standards of working conditions to compete in the intense competitive market.

    – Outsourcing its tasks and activities- Ethical challenges are involved in selecting the correct third party and outsourcing nominal tasks as per the company policies.

    – Bribery and corruption – to get things done in the foreign country

  6. What are some of the critical ethical challenges to firms competing in the global economy?

Analyze the functions of management and ethical principles for executing effective decision making in organizations

Toyota (specific to recalls over the last decade)

Toyota.com

 The Toyota Recall

 What Really Happened to Toyota?

 Can Toyota Recover Its Reputation for Quality?

In this assignment, analyze the company’s (Toyota) ineffective implementation of the fundamental principles of management. Once you analyze the struggling company, your task will be to make recommendations for a management improvement plan explaining how the company’s management team can improve in areas such as decision making, employee performance, and sustainability.

Analyze how an organization’s goals influence organizational planning that informs strategic decision making

 Analyze the functions of management and ethical principles for executing effective decision making in organizations

 Apply management techniques that ensure the continuous improvement of personnel and business processes to measure organizational performance

 Apply communication techniques aimed at increasing employee performance, thus achieving organizational goals and objectives

 Illustrate the important connection between management and organizational culture

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Profile of a Struggling Company

a. Assess how the current management planning practices interfere with or prohibit the organization’s ability to optimally function. You could consider using the fundamental principles of management in your explanation.

b. Describe how the employees’ perception and organizational culture have been impacted by management’s performance. You could consider the connections between management and its impact on culture.

c. Explain how communication has played a part in management’s inability to increase employee performance. You could consider the connections to specific communication barriers that exist within the organization.

Explain the motivations of Starbucks opening their first store in South Africa?

When Culture Doesn’t Translate

How to expand abroad without losing your company’s mojo by Erin Meyer

ARTWORK Shannon Rankin, Peak Uncharted series, 2009, map, adhesive, paper, 20″ x 20″ SPOTLIGHT

66  Harvard Business Review October 2015

SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER

 

 

Erin Meyer is a professor at INSEAD and directs two of its executive education programs: Managing Global Virtual Teams and Management Skills for International Business. She is the author of The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business (PublicAffairs, 2014). Twitter: @ErinMeyerINSEAD.

HBR.ORG

October 2015 Harvard Business Review 67

 

 

UNTIL RECENTLY MOST of us worked in organizations that were largely local. We interacted with col- leagues and clients who were with us and cultur- ally like us. Fellow staff members were often in the same building and at the very least were in the same country, which meant that they had similar ways of communicating and making decisions.

But as companies internationalize, their em- ployees become geographically dispersed and lose their shared assumptions and norms. People in different countries react to inputs differently, com- municate differently, and make decisions differ- ently. Organically grown corporate cultures that were long taken for granted begin to break down. Miscommunication becomes more frequent, and trust erodes, especially between the head office and the regional units. In their efforts to fix these prob- lems, companies risk compromising attributes that underlie their commercial success.

In the following pages I’ll describe the process of cultural disintegration and illustrate how tradi- tional solutions can backfire. I’ll conclude with five principles that can help executives prevent disinte- gration from setting in. Consciously and wisely ap- plying them will lead to a more nuanced understand- ing of the forces at play, which in itself will increase the chances of success.

Implicit Communication Breaks Down In companies where everyone is located in the same country, passing messages implicitly is frequently the norm. The closer the space we share and the more similar our cultural backgrounds, the stronger our reliance on unspoken cues. In these settings we communicate in shorthand, often without realizing it—reading our counterparts’ tone of voice, pick- ing up on subtext. A manager at Louis Vuitton told me, “At our company, managers didn’t finish their

sentences. Instead, they would begin to make a point and then say something like ‘OK, you get it?’ And for us, that said it all.”

A lot of work is done in this implicit way without anyone’s taking note. If I walk by your office and see you studying October’s budget with a worried look, I might send you a comprehensive breakdown of my costs for the month. If I see you shrink in your seat when the boss asks if you can meet a deadline, I know that your “yes” really means “I wish I could,” and I might follow you to your office after the meet- ing to hear the real deal. In such ways we continually adjust to one another’s unspoken cues.

But when companies begin to expand interna- tionally, implicit communication stops working. If you don’t tell me you need a budget breakdown, I won’t send one. If you say yes even though you mean no, I’ll think that you agreed. Because we aren’t in the same place, we can’t read one another’s body language—and because we’re from different cultures, we probably couldn’t read it accurately even if we were within arm’s length. The more we work with people from other cultures in far-flung locations, the less we pick up on subtle meaning and the more we fall victim to misunderstanding and inefficiency.

The obvious solution is to put in place multiple processes that encourage employees to recap key messages and map out in words and pictograms who works for whom, with what responsibilities, and who will take which steps and when. For many organizations, that kind of change is largely posi- tive. One banking executive told me, “The more we internationalized, the more we were forced to recap both orally and in writing what was meant and what was understood. And that was good for everybody. We realized that even among those of us sitting at headquarters, the added repetition meant better understanding and fewer false starts.”

SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER

68  Harvard Business Review October 2015

 

 

One downside, of course, is that companies be- come more bureaucratic and communication slows down. But that isn’t the only cost. At Louis Vuitton, for example, mystery is part of the value proposition and infuses the way people work. Employees are not just comfortable with ambiguity; they embrace it, because they believe it is central to the company’s success. One manager told me, “The more we wipe out ambiguity between what was meant and what was heard, the further we wander from that essential mysterious ingredient in our corporate culture that has led to our success.”

For companies in beauty, fashion, and other cre- ative industries, the advantages of implicit commu- nication may be particularly strong. But many other types of internationalizing companies have activities that may benefit from letting people leave messages open to interpretation, and they, too, need to think carefully about processes that might erode valuable ambiguity in an effort to improve communication.

Fault Lines Appear Breakdowns in implicit communication exacerbate the second problem an internationalizing company faces: Employees frequently split into separate camps that have an “us versus them” dynamic.

It’s natural to feel trust and empathy for those we see daily and those who think like us. We eat lunch together. We laugh together at the coffee machine. It’s hard to feel the same bond with people we don’t see regularly, especially when they speak an unfa- miliar language and have experienced the world dif- ferently. When one New York–based financial insti- tution opened offices in Asia, it struggled to export its highly collaborative culture, in which key deci- sions involve a great deal of consultation. Despite management’s best efforts, the local offices created what one executive described as “overseas cocoons,”

in which employees shared work and consulted with one another but remained isolated from their colleagues in the United States.

Often headquarters wants to be inclusive but finds that employees’ exchanges are hampered by differences in social customs. One Thai manager in the financial firm explained, “In Thai culture, there is a strong emphasis on avoiding mistakes, and we are very group oriented in our decision making. If the Americans want to hear from us on a conference call, they need to send the agenda at least 24 hours in advance so that we can prepare what we’d like to say and get feedback from our peers.”

Unfortunately, the Thai manager told me, his U.S. colleagues usually didn’t send the agenda until an hour before the call, so his team was unable to pre- pare. And it struggled to understand what was said during the call, because the U.S. participants spoke too quickly. He also said that the Americans rarely invited comments from the Thais, expecting them to jump into the conversation as they themselves

Idea in Brief THE PROBLEM Many global corporations suffer from miscommunication and misunderstandings, especially between the head office and regional units. This leads to a breakdown in trust. In trying to prevent those problems, companies often lose a key component of what makes them successful.

THE CHALLENGE How can managers adapt individual employees and the organization as a whole to the realities of working in a global marketplace?

THE APPROACH Success involves the careful application of five principles: • Identify the dimensions

of difference • Give everyone a voice • Protect your most

creative units • Train everyone in key norms • Be heterogeneous everywhere

“ The more we wipe out ambiguity between what was meant and what was heard, the further we wander from that essential mysterious ingredient in our corporate culture that has led to our success.”

—A MANAGER AT LOUIS VUITTON

HBR.ORG

October 2015 Harvard Business Review 69

WHEN CULTURE DOESN’T TRANSLATE

 

 

and you don’t need to understand local consum- ers, it may be best to ignore local culture in order to preserve the organizational core.

For example, Google believes that its success is largely the result of a strong organizational culture. Part of that culture involves giving employees lots of positive feedback. The company’s performance re- view form begins by instructing managers, “List the things this employee did really well.” Only then does it say, “List one thing this person could do to have a bigger impact.” When Google moved into France, it learned that in that country, positive words are used sparingly and criticism is provided more strongly. One French manager told me, “The first time I used the Google form to give a performance review, I was confused. Where was the section to talk about prob- lem areas? ‘What did this employee do really well?’ The positive wording sounded over the top.” But Google’s corporate culture is so strong that it often supersedes local preferences; the French manager added, “After five years at Google France, I can tell you we are now a group of French people who give negative feedback in a very un-French way.”

Creating a strong corporate culture that is pretty much the same from Beijing to Brasília makes things easier and more efficient internally. But it carries risks. A company with a strong culture typically hires employees who can fit into that culture and trains them to work and behave in a globally accepted fash- ion. But if you hire the rare Saudi who will challenge authority figures and encourage him to do so, you may find that his egalitarian directness keeps him from closing deals with local clients and suppliers.

Planning for Your International Culture As companies internationalize to exploit new op- portunities, how can they prevent communication breakdowns, fault lines, and other risks? As with most cultural and organizational dysfunctions, the cures are often less obvious than the symptoms, and the specifics will vary from case to case. Nonetheless, my experience suggests that if companies apply some ground rules carefully, they are more likely to adapt their culture to new countries without losing key strengths.

Identify the dimensions of difference. The first imperative when managing a clash between a corporate culture and a national one is understanding the relevant dimensions along which those cultures

would. But that kind of intervention is not the norm in Thailand, where it is much less common to speak if not invited or questioned. The Thai manager summed up his perspective this way: “They invite us to the meeting, but they don’t suggest with their actions that they care what we have to say.” The Thai team members ended up just sitting on the phone listening—giving the Americans the impression that they had nothing to contribute or weren’t interested in participating.

Corporate Culture Clashes with Local Culture As companies institute rules about communication and inclusiveness, they often run into a third prob- lem. Consider the Dutch shipping company TNT, which has long put a premium on task-oriented effi- ciency and egalitarian management. When it moved into China, it found that neither of those values fit with local norms. Its corporate culture gradually be- came more relationship oriented and more hierarchi- cal, as leaders in Asia adapted their styles to attract local clients and motivate the local workforce.

The problem with that kind of adaptation is that a company’s culture is often a key driver of its suc- cess. Let’s look at L’Oréal. Confrontation and open disagreement are a strong part of its corporate cul- ture. As one manager put it, “At L’Oréal we believe the more we debate openly and the more strongly we disagree in meetings, the closer we get to excel- lence, the more we generate creativity, and the more we reduce risk.”

Yet in many important growth areas for L’Oréal, including Southeast Asia and Latin America, that attitude is in direct opposition to a cultural prefer- ence for group harmony. A Mexican employee ex- plained, “In Mexican culture, open disagreement is considered rude, disrespectful, and too aggressive.” An Indonesian employee said, “To an Indonesian person, confrontation in a group setting is extremely negative, because it makes the other person lose face. So it’s something that we try strongly to avoid in any open manner.”

If you believe that your corporate culture is what makes your company great, you might focus on maintaining it in all your offices, even when it con- flicts with local practice. This can work for compa- nies with a highly innovative product offering and few or no local competitors. In other words, if your corporate culture has led to extreme innovation

FURTHER READING For more insights on cross-cultural management, see:

The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business Erin Meyer PublicAffairs, 2014

“Contextual Intelligence” Tarun Khanna HBR, September 2014

“Voices from the Front Lines” Luc Minguet, Eduardo Caride, Takeo Yamaguchi, and Shane Tedjarati HBR, September 2014

“Navigating the Cultural Minefield” Erin Meyer HBR, May 2014

“L’Oréal Masters Multiculturalism” Hae-Jung Hong and Yves Doz HBR, June 2013

Riding the Waves of Culture: Understanding Diversity in Global Business Fons Trompenaars and Charles Hampden-Turner McGraw-Hill, 2012 (3rd edition)

Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind Geert Hofstede, Gert Jan Hofstede, and Michael Minkov McGraw-Hill, 2010 (3rd edition)

70  Harvard Business Review October 2015

SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER

 

 

achieve their business objectives. Draw a ring around those areas and let communication within them re- main more ambiguous, with flexible job descriptions and meetings that are less predefined.

Elsewhere in the company, where there is no clear benefit to leaving things open to interpreta- tion, go ahead and formalize all systems, processes, and communications. The areas that lend them- selves to more-explicit procedures include finance, IT, and production.

You might want to put everything in writing to avoid misperceptions later on. If you don’t have an employee handbook, or if your handbook is some- times vague, you’ll need to create a detailed one. But before you start crafting precise job descriptions, make sure you have protected the parts of your com- pany that rely on implicit communication and fluid processes for business success.

Train everyone in key norms. When enter- ing a new market, you’ll inevitably have to adapt to some of the local norms. But you should also train local employees to adapt to some of your corporate norms. For example, L’Oréal offers a program called Managing Confrontation, which teaches a methodi- cal approach to expressing disagreement in meetings. Employees around the world hear about the impor- tance of debate for success in the company. A Chinese employee told me, “We don’t do this type of debate traditionally in China, but these trainings have taught us a method of expressing diverging opinions which we have all come to practice and appreciate, even in meetings made up of only Chinese.”

Exxon Mobil, which prides itself on task-oriented efficiency but has large operations in strongly rela- tionship-oriented societies such as Qatar and Nigeria, reaps tangible benefits from getting employees to adapt to its culture, rather than the other way around. One Qatari employee told me, “The task-oriented

vary. Are decisions made by consensus, or does the boss decide? Are timeliness and structure foremost in everyone’s mind, or is flexibility at the heart of the company’s success? Only after you’ve figured out where the pressure points are can you make plans for dealing with them.

It’s important to perform this analysis along mul- tiple dimensions, because managers tend to boil cul- tural differences down to one or two features, often causing unexpected problems. (See my May 2014 HBR article, “Navigating the Cultural Minefield.”) For in- stance, French executives expecting straight talk from U.S. colleagues are routinely tripped up by Americans’ reluctance to give harsh feedback, while expatriate Americans are often blindsided by their outwardly polite and socially aware French bosses’ savage cri- tiques. That said, you can typically reduce the dif- ferences you actually have to manage to just three or four dimensions. (For more on how to conduct your analysis, see the “Further Reading” list.)

Give everyone a voice. Although you can vary many rules according to culture and corporate func- tion, the one you absolutely must adopt is ensuring that every cultural group is heard. In practical terms, this involves applying three tenets during meetings and other interactions, especially when people are participating remotely:

• When you invite local offices to phone or video conferences, send the agenda well in advance (not the same day!) and designate a time for those in each location to speak. This allows participants to adequately prepare their comments and double- check them with colleagues.

• Insist that everyone use global English, speaking slowly and clearly, and assign someone to recap the discussion, especially when conversations speed up.

• Check in with international participants every five or 10 minutes and invite them to speak: “Any in- put from Thailand?” or “Budsaree, did you have any feedback?”

If you follow these basics, you’ll go a long way toward preventing people from thinking that their colleagues in other cultures “never speak up because they are hiding information,” “have nothing to con- tribute,” or “say they want our input, but act like they don’t care what we think.”

Protect your most creative units. As your company expands geographically, map out the areas of the organization (usually functional units) that rely heavily on creativity and mutual adjustment to

“ The first time I used the company’s form to give a performance review, I was confused. Where was the section to talk about problem areas? The positive wording sounded over the top.”

—A MANAGER AT GOOGLE FRANCE

HBR.ORG

October 2015 Harvard Business Review 71

WHEN CULTURE DOESN’T TRANSLATE

 

 

BusinessObjects took further steps to get the col- laboration back on track. Five engineers from the Indian office were sent to California for six months, and three Americans moved to Bangalore. Some Americans already based in Bangalore were hired for Sanjay’s team, and Sarah hired several Indians living in California. Bit by bit the divisiveness decreased and a sense of unity emerged.

GETTING CULTURE right should never be an after- thought. Companies that don’t plan for how indi- vidual employees and the organization as a whole will adapt to the realities of a global marketplace will sooner or later find themselves stumbling because of unnoticed cultural potholes. And by the time they regain their balance, their economic opportunity may have passed. HBR Reprint R1510C

“ The task-oriented mentality gives us a common work platform within the company, so when Texas-based employees are collaborating with Arabs or Brazilians or Nigerians, we all have a similar approach.”

—AN EMPLOYEE OF EXXON MOBIL

mentality gives us a common work platform within the company, so when Texas-based employees are collaborating with Arabs or Brazilians or Nigerians, we all have a similar approach. Cultural differences don’t hit us as hard as some companies.”

Be heterogeneous everywhere. If 99% of your engineers in Shanghai are Chinese and 99% of your HR experts in London are British, you run a high risk of having fault lines appear. If all the Shanghai em- ployees are in their thirties and all those in London are in their fifties, the rifts may widen. And if almost all the Shanghai employees are men while most of the London employees are women, things may get even worse. Take steps at the start to ensure diversity in each location. Mix the tasks and functions among locations. Instruct staff members to build bridges of cultural understanding.

When BusinessObjects, a company based in France and the United States, expanded into India, cultural differences quickly arose regarding commu- nication up and down the hierarchy. One U.S. man- ager, Sarah, told me, “I often need information from individuals on Sanjay’s staff. I e-mail them asking for input but get no response. The lack of communica- tion is astounding.” When I spoke with Sanjay, he said, “Sarah sends e-mails directly to my staff with- out getting my OK or even copying me. Those e-mails should go to me directly, but she seems to purpose- fully leave me out of the process. Of course, when my staff receives those e-mails, they are paralyzed.”

This relatively minor cultural misunderstanding created tensions aggravated by the fact that all the local employees in Bangalore had spent their entire lives in India; none were in a position to see things from the other perspective. The majority were soft- ware engineers in their twenties. And the California office was made up entirely of American mid-career marketing experts, none of whom had ever been to India. A small issue threatened to sink the enterprise.

After holding face-to-face meetings with Sarah’s team and Sanjay’s, during which the misunder- standing was explained and worked through, JO

H N

C AL

DW EL

L

“I know what you’re thinking. Bonus points for spelling “incarcerated” correctly nine times on a résumé.”

72  Harvard Business Review October 2015

SPOTLIGHT ON THE NEW GLOBAL LEADER HBR.ORG

 

 

Harvard Business Review Notice of Use Restrictions, May 2009

Harvard Business Review and Harvard Business Publishing Newsletter content on EBSCOhost is licensed for the private individual use of authorized EBSCOhost users. It is not intended for use as assigned course material in academic institutions nor as corporate learning or training materials in businesses. Academic licensees may not use this content in electronic reserves, electronic course packs, persistent linking from syllabi or by any other means of incorporating the content into course resources. Business licensees may not host this content on learning management systems or use persistent linking or other means to incorporate the content into learning management systems. Harvard Business Publishing will be pleased to grant permission to make this content available through such means. For rates and permission, contact permissions@harvardbusiness.org.

Essentials Of Strategic Management -Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Environmental Sustainability, And Strategy CH9

Essentials of Strategic Management
Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Environmental Sustainability, and Strategy CH9

 

 

1
Business ethics encompasses _______________
A)
the application of ethical principles and standards to business activities, behavior, and decisions.
B)
a business commitment to safe products, high worker compensation, and protection of the environment.
C)
conducting oneself appropriately in a business setting.
D)
developing a special set of ethical standards for businesses to observe in conducting their affairs.
E)
picking and choosing among various ethical standards of society to arrive at a set of ethical standards that apply directly to operating a business.

2
Ethical principles in business _______________
A)
concern the behavioral guidelines a company’s top management and board of directors set for company personnel regarding “what is right” and “what is wrong” in conducting the company’s business.
B)
deal chiefly with the actions and behaviors required to operate companies in a socially responsible manner.
C)
are arrived at by picking and choosing among the consensus ethical standards of society to come up with a set of ethical standards that apply directly to operating a business.
D)
are not materially different from ethical principles in general and have to be judged in the context of society’s standards of right and wrong, not by a special set of rules that businesspeople decide to apply to their own conduct.
E)
involve behavioral guidelines for balancing the interests of nonowner stakeholders (customers, employees, suppliers, and the communities in which the company has operations) against the interests of company shareholders.

3
Unethical managerial behavior tends to be driven by such factors as _______________
A)
overzealous or obsessive pursuit of personal gain, wealth, and other self interests; a company culture that puts the profitability and good business performance ahead of ethical behavior; and heavy pressures on company managers to meet or beat performance targets.
B)
the lack of a company code of ethics.
C)
a lack of training in what is ethical and what is not.
D)
confusing differences between what is ethical behavior in one’s personal life and what is ethically permissible in business.
E)
All of the above factors.

4
A company’s strategy needs to be ethical because _______________
A)
of the potential for embarrassment to top management if the company’s unethical behavior is publicly exposed.
B)
unethical strategies are inconsistent with or else weaken the corporate culture.
C)
ethics watchdogs are sure to blow the whistle on the company’s unethical behavior.
D)
of the risks of prosecution by governmental authorities if an unethical strategy is disclosed.
E)
a strategy that is unethical not only damages the company’s reputation but it also can have costly consequences.

5
Which of the following are consequences of pursuing a strategy that has unethical or shady components?
A)
Government fines and penalties.
B)
Legal and investigative costs incurred by the company.
C)
Customer defections.
D)
Adverse effects on employee productivity.
E)
All of these.

6
Notions of right and wrong, fair and unfair, moral and immoral, ethical and unethical _______________
A)
ultimately depend on a person’s own values and beliefs.
B)
ultimately depend on the circumstances—nothing is really black or white when it comes to ethical standards.
C)
are governed mainly by religious views held in different geographic regions of the world.
D)
are present in all societies, organizations, and individuals.
E)
vary enormously from country to country across the world.

7
According to the school of ethical universalism, _______________
A)
what behaviors are “ethically right” and “ethically wrong” vary across religions, but the boundaries of what is ethical or not are universal within religions.
B)
concepts of right and wrong universally apply to all business situations within a given country but can vary across countries or cultures.
C)
ethical guidelines exist only when there is universal agreement as to what behaviors are “ethically right” and “ethically wrong”; anything not universally viewed as unethical is thus within the bounds of what is ethically permissible.
D)
all societies and countries have some definition of what is ethically permissible (in this sense ethics are universal); however, the definitions of what is ethically permissible vary according to the prevailing religious doctrines in each country.
E)
many of the same standards of what’s ethical and what’s unethical resonate with peoples of most societies regardless of local traditions and cultural norms—hence, to the extent there is common moral agreement about right and wrong actions, common ethical standards can be used to judge the conduct of personnel at companies operating in a variety of country markets and cultural circumstances.

8
The thesis that because different societies and cultures have divergent values and standards of what is “ethically right” and “ethically wrong” it is appropriate to judge behavior as ethical/unethical in the light of local customs and social mores _______________
A)
is the basis for the theory of ethical variation.
B)
defines what is meant by “integrated social contracts theory.”
C)
is a view that characterizes the school of ethical relativism.
D)
accounts for why there is no such thing as ethical standards for business enterprises.
E)
is the reason codes of ethical and social morality have been established country by country.

9
If one adopts the thinking of the school of ethical relativism, then _______________
A)
there are multiple sets of ethical standards because what is ethical or unethical depends on local customs and social mores and can vary from one culture or nation to another.
B)
there is a “one-size-fits-all” set of authentic ethical standards.
C)
the preferred set of ethical standards is the one that society at large has put in place in the form of laws and regulations.
D)
the prevailing ethical standards are the product of a system of “integrated social contracts.”
E)
no ethical standards are ever truly “authentic”—they exist only to the extent that there is a temporary shared conviction among company managers and company personnel that a particular behavior is either ethically permissible or ethically impermissible.

10
Companies that adopt the principle of ethical relativism in providing ethical guidance to company personnel _______________
A)
are able to comply with the varying ethical standards of the world’s different cultures.
B)
have no fair way to judge the ethical ness of the conduct of company personnel.
C)
quickly find themselves on a slippery slope with no ethical standards or principles of their own.
D)
have a uniform code of ethical standards that is applied globally.
E)
end up allowing each company employee to determine what set of ethical standards to observe.

11
According to integrated social contracts theory, _______________
A)
the views and principles of the school of ethical universalism are definitely wrong; the  view is that ethics is a matter of personal responsibility not a matter of management concern.
B)
the ethical standards a company should try to uphold are governed both by (1) a limited number of universal ethical principles that are widely recognized as putting legitimate ethical boundaries on actions and behavior in all situations and (2) the circumstances of local cultures, traditions, and shared values that further prescribe what constitutes ethically permissible behavior and what does not—however, universal ethical norms take precedence over local ethical norms.
C)
the standards of what is ethically permissible and what is not should be based on a code of ethical and moral conduct that each society/country/culture adopts and then enacts into law.
D)
the standards of what is ethically permissible should be determined by the terms of an “ethics contract” that each company employee signs as a condition of employment.
E)
the only valid ethical standards are those that are universal—and then only if the standards are not absolute and provide some wiggle room according to the circumstances of the each situation.

12
Integrated social contracts theory maintains that _______________
A)
all ethical standards are determined by societal norms and individuals have an implied social contract to live up to these standards.
B)
“first order” universal ethical norms always take precedence over “second order” local ethical norms.
C)
there should be no absolute limits put on what is ethically or morally right.
D)
few nations or cultures have common moral agreement on what is ethically right and wrong.
E)
each country/culture/society has commonly held views about what constitutes ethically appropriate actions/behaviors that all individuals in that country/culture/society are obligated to observe.

13
The costs companies incur when ethical wrongdoing is discovered and punished do not primarily include_______________
A)
the costs to shareholders in the form of a lower stock price (and possibly lower dividends).
B)
the costs of providing remedial education and ethics training to company personnel.
C)
lost employee morale and higher degrees of employee cynicism.
D)
civil penalties arising from class-action lawsuits and other litigation aimed at punishing the company for its offense and the harm done to others.
E)
increased dividend pay-out to restore the trust of its shareholders.

14
The theory of corporate social responsibility concerns _______________
A)
a company’s duty to maximize shareholder value.
B)
the blending of shareholder interests and employee interests.
C)
a company’s duty to establish socially acceptable core values and to have a strictly enforced code of ethical conduct.
D)
the responsibility that top management has for ensuring that the company’s actions and decisions are in the best interest of society at large.
E)
The company’s responsibility to balance between strategic actions to benefit shareholders against the duty to be a good corporate citizen.

15
Which of the following is not generally on a company’s menu of actions to consider in crafting a strategy of social responsibility?
A)
Efforts to employ an ethical strategy and observe ethical principles in operating the business.
B)
Actions to provide suppliers, distributors, and other value chain partners with handsome profit margins.
C)
Making charitable contributions, supporting community service endeavors, engaging in broader philanthropic initiatives, and reaching out to make a difference in the lives of the disadvantaged.
D)
Actions to build a workforce that is diverse with respect to gender, race, national origin, and other aspects that different people bring to the workplace.
E)
Actions to protect the environment and, in particular, to minimize or eliminate any adverse impact on the environment stemming from the company’s own business activities.

16
The business case for an ethical strategy _______________
A)
focuses primarily on costs that are difficult to quantify (for example, customer defections and adverse effects on employee productivity) but can often be the most devastating.
B)
emphasizes that pursuing unethical strategies not only damages a company’s reputation but can also have costly, wide-ranging consequences.
C)
starts with numerous ethical rules and guidelines and an environment where employees rely on these rules for moral guidance.
D)
starts with managers who understand there is big difference between adopting values statements and codes of ethics that serve merely as window dressing and those that truly paint the white lines for a company’s actual strategy and business conduct.
E)
begins with ethical guidelines that help send the message that management takes the observance of ethical norms seriously and that behavior falling outside ethical boundaries will have negative consequences.

17
Environmental sustainability involves _______________
A)
a corporate commitment to address the unmet noneconomic needs of society.
B)
deliberate actions to protect the environment, provide for the longevity of natural resources, maintain ecological support systems for future generations, and guard against the ultimate endangerment of the planet.
C)
striking a balance between (1) the economic responsibility to reward shareholders with profits, (2) the legal responsibility by the company to laws in countries where it operates, (3) the ethical responsibility to abide by society’s moral norms, and (4) the discretionary philanthropic responsibility to contribute to the noneconomic needs of society.
D)
developing the resource strengths necessary to develop a sustainable competitive advantage.
E)
All of these.

18
Companies committed to environmental sustainability _______________
A)
make major contributions to local civic and charitable organizations.
B)
consider the commitment to the environment as a “first order” priority, commitment to employees as a “second order” priority, and commitment to shareholders as a “third order” commitment.
C)
believe it is essential to strike a balance between shareholder interests and the interests of stakeholders such as suppliers, customers, employees, and the communities in which they operate.
D)
develop and market only products that are “environmentally friendly.”
E)
adopt sustainable business practices that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability to meet the needs of the future.

19
Which one of the following is not a part of the business case for why companies should act in a socially responsible manner?
A)
A strong commitment to socially responsible behavior reduces the risk of reputation-damaging incidents.
B)
The aggressive pursuit of market share, revenues, and profits always puts the company in jeopardy of violating society’s social responsibility expectations.
C)
Conceived social responsibility strategies work to the advantage of shareholders.
D)
Socially responsible actions yield internal benefits (particularly for employee recruiting, workforce retention, and training costs) and can improve operational efficiency.
E)
Social responsibility actions can lead to increased buyer patronage.

20
The business case for why companies should act in a socially responsible manner includes such reasons as _______________
A)
improving operational efficiency.
B)
avoiding criticism from consumer, environmental, and human rights activist groups.
C)
contributing to lower employee turnover and better worker productivity.
D)
the potential for increased buyer patronage.
E)
All of these.