Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Corruption at workplaces
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Corruption at workplaces
Dealing with unethical practices According to Michael – even after the recent corrupted scandals within business organizations resulting in regulators making things more complicated by addressing the situation by adding more laws and regulations, little attention has been given to how the nature, and not the substance of new rules may or may not affect the ethical decision-making process Michael - These signs make it very tough to argue that regulators lacked the appropriate statutes and regulations to prove that organizations and individuals were involved in unethical behavior. Furthermore, the high number of guilty pleas and settlements that were made, suggests that either the defendants new the difference between right and wrong and they chose to act in an unethical behavior or that their lawyers knew that their chances of convincing the jury to the contrary were very minimal. Michael - Even with the many rules that existed, regulators responded the business scandals by passing the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The act set new and improved standards for all U.S. public compani...
Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley Acts are important legislations in the corporate world because of their link to public and privately held companies. Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted to enhance transparency and accountability in publicly traded companies. On the contrary, Dodd-Frank Act was enacted to disentangle the confused web of financial service company valuations. Actually, these valuations are usually hidden by complex and unclear financial instruments. The introduction of Sarbanes-Oxley Act was fueled by recent incidents of accounting frauds by top executives of major corporations such as Enron. In contrast, Dodd-Frank Act was enacted as a response to the tendency by banks, insurance companies, hedge funds, rating agencies, and accounting companies to serve up harmful offer of ruined assets and liabilities brought by systemic non-disclosure (Anand, 2011, p.1). While these regulations have some similarities and differences, they have a strong relationship with the financial markets.
Consistent accounting and financial frauds in the U.S. alerted the SEC to the imperative need for policy and corporate governance changes. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002 was enacted to encourage financial disclosures, enhance corporate responsibility, and combat fraudulent behaviour. This Act also helped create the PCAOB, which oversees the auditing practice (Stanwick & Stanwick 2009).
A possible flaw of Sarbanes-Oxley is it failed to put up any resistance in thwarting the financial crisis. While the degree to which fraudulent behavior can be traced to the roots of the Great Panic of 2007 will likely be up for eternal debate, it might be telling that Sarbanes-Oxley effectively did nothing. It seems this could indicate that stronger incentives for whistleblowers (such as Dodd-Frank and perhaps other whistleblower protection regimes) are very necessary given the extreme social costs. This conclusion may be hasty, however, given the short time period between the enactment of Sarbanes-Oxley and the crash. Not only is the status of Sarbanes-Oxley still in flux over a decade later, but one has to consider the substantial learning and switching costs associated with a regime with such a substantial ruach. Certainly, this is not to say that additional protections may in fact be necessary given the putative reluctance of lawyers to report fraud, but Sarbanes-Oxley likely needed more time to really crystalize and provide some level of predictability before it can be declared a bust.
Throughout the past several years major corporate scandals have rocked the economy and hurt investor confidence. The largest bankruptcies in history have resulted from greedy executives that “cook the books” to gain the numbers they want. These scandals typically involve complex methods for misusing or misdirecting funds, overstating revenues, understating expenses, overstating the value of assets or underreporting of liabilities, sometimes with the cooperation of officials in other corporations (Medura 1-3). In response to the increasing number of scandals the US government amended the Sarbanes Oxley act of 2002 to mitigate these problems. Sarbanes Oxley has extensive regulations that hold the CEO and top executives responsible for the numbers they report but problems still occur. To ensure proper accounting standards have been used Sarbanes Oxley also requires that public companies be audited by accounting firms (Livingstone). The problem is that the accounting firms are also public companies that also have to look after their bottom line while still remaining objective with the corporations they audit. When an accounting firm is hired the company that hired them has the power in the relationship. When the company has the power they can bully the firm into doing what they tell them to do. The accounting firm then loses its objectivity and independence making their job ineffective and not accomplishing their goal of honest accounting (Gerard). Their have been 379 convictions of fraud to date, and 3 to 6 new cases opening per month. The problem has clearly not been solved (Ulinski).
When you accept familiar clientele, you accept not being able to break confidentiality and possibly tarnishing your familial ties. Family and friends expect more of you than your clients who do not know you outside of the room. Friends and family do not expect to have boundaries even if they become your patients, which brings me to my next point: boundaries in forensic psychology.
Do you agree with Schmeltekopf that business schools are not preparing students well for the for the ethical challenges they will face in the workplace? Why or why not?
...The Sarbanes-Oxley Act deals with the proper filing of financial paperwork along with rules and regulations to follow while working as a top business (The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 2002). Some of the consequences that derived from the Act include fines and possible imprisonment up to 20 years for destroying documents. It also made it a crime to destroy corporate audit records. Since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was in place at the time Bernie Madoff was charged with security fraud, he received 25 years in prison for his wrong-doings (Bernard Madoff, 2014). These crimes by Madoff and Enron have made for safer business practices and stricter laws. However, to ensure cases of this magnitude do not occur again, companies must not only abide by mandated law, they must develop a culture deeply rooted in strong ethics. Character matters in a business just like it does in people.
The term “ethical business” is seen, by many people, as an oxymoron. This is because a business’s main objective is to make as much money as possible. Making the most money possible, however, can often lead to unethical actions. Companies like Enron, WorldCom, and Satyam have been the posterchildren for how corporations’ greed lead to unethical practices. In recent times however, companies have been accused of being unethical based on, not how they manage their finances, but on how they treat the society that they operate in. People have started to realize that the damage companies have been doing to the world around them is more impactful and far worse than any financial fraud that these companies might be engaging in. Events like the BP oil
Many ethical dilemmas are philosophical in nature, an ethical issue can be described as a problem with no clear resolution. In order to solve the issue or dilemma a consensus between the parties involved must be reached. There are several reasons to come to an agreement over an ethical dilemma, it is the basis for all aspects of personal and professional dealings. Each one of us is part of a civilized society and as such it is our responsibility to be rational, honest and loyal in our dealings with others. (Alakavuklar, 2012) states that individuals make decisions for different situations in business life involving various ethical dilemmas. Each time either consciously or unconsciously individuals may follow some ethical approaches
According to Umphress and Bingham (as cited in Graham, Ziegert & Capitano, 2013), unethical pro-organizational behavior refers to “actions that are intended to promote the effective functioning of the organization or its members (e.g. leaders) and violate core societal values, mores, laws, or standards of proper conduct” (p. 423). One of the typical examples of unethical pro-organizational behavior is accounting fraud. Accounting fraud is purposeful act of changing the financial statement to increase the investors’ incentive to invest in the company. In 2001, avoiding reporting expenditures to increase the asset in its financial statement, Enron’s accounting scandal led to catastrophically consequence. Many employees lost their jobs, retirement funds, health benefits, and stock option. Investors lost billions of dollars. Unethical pro-organizational behavior not only adversely affects the managers and workers of the organization, but also affects investors and the economic in
Ethics are the driving force behind good business. Every ethical choice made by a professional can and will have a much different outcome than any unethical choice. Bad ethics can ruin many aspects of a business and as (Gaye-Anderson, 2007) states how quite easily the lives and professional reputation of the employees can even be severally damaged (para. 3). Everything from morale to motivation can be severely affected by poor ethical choices. Customers will take their business elsewhere. Employees will abandon ship. Other, competing businesses reap the benefits of the bad moral choices. Ultimately, the entire business can be brought down by one poor ethical choice.
This all happened under the watchful eye of an auditor, Arthur Andersen. After this scandal, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was changed to keep into account the role of the auditors and how they can help in preventing such scandals.
Much of our lives we are faced with situations where we come across the opportunity to make ethical and unethical decisions or opinions. We come across difficult people who live their lives unethically. Do we allow them to influence us? Do we become transparent and lose ourselves when it seems as though everyone is doing something that is morally wrong? I for one, do not give in to this peer pressure.
Everyone in this world has experienced an ethical dilemma in different situations and this may arise between one or more individuals. Ethical dilemma is a situation where people have to make complex decisions and are influenced based on personal interest, social environment or norms, and religious beliefs (“Strategic Leadership”, n.d.). The leaders and managers in the company should set guidelines to ensure employees are aware and have a better chance to solve and make ethical decisions. Employees are also responsible in understanding their ethical obligations in order to maintain a positive work environment. The purpose of this case study is to identify the dilemma and analyze different decisions to find ways on how a person should act
The Facts: Kermit Vandivier works for B.F. Goodrich. His job assignment was to write the qualifying report on the four disk brakes for LTV Aerospace Corporation. LTV purchased aircraft brakes from B.F. Goodrich for the Air Force. Goodrich desperately wanted the contract because it guaranteed a commitment from the Air Force on future brake purchases for the A7D from them, even if they lost money on the initial contract.