Ethics Assessment Business Meeting Or Paid Vacation

Ethics Assessment business Meeting Or Paid For Vacationfor The Last Se

Amberson Corporation has been purchasing software from Hacker, Inc., which hosts an annual four-day conference primarily aimed at important customers. The conference includes leisure activities such as golf, swimming, and scuba, with all expenses paid by Hacker, excluding transportation. Critics argue that these junkets may be unfair and influence purchasing decisions through possible gift-giving. The company now reexamines whether its attendance at these meetings is ethical and whether to implement policies against accepting gifts from suppliers or customers.

This situation raises ethical questions surrounding corporate gift-giving, hospitality, and the influence of corporate events on decision-making. As the Corporate Governance Officer of Amberson, my role involves assessing the impact on stakeholders, considering ethical principles, and determining appropriate actions to uphold integrity, transparency, and fairness.

Paper For Above instruction

In the context of corporate ethics, the situation involving Amberson Corporation and Hacker, Inc. provides a compelling case study on the influence of corporate hospitality and the potential for conflicts of interest. Key stakeholders include Amberson's shareholders, employees, management, suppliers such as Hacker, Inc., customers, and even the broader industry community. Each stakeholder group has a vested interest in maintaining fair and transparent business practices that promote sustainable success without favoritism or corruption.

The primary ethical issues involve the propriety of accepting gifts or hospitality that could compromise objectivity in decision-making. The typical concern is whether the lavish, expense-paid conference created an environment where judgment could be impaired, leading to biased purchasing decisions or unfair advantages over competitors. The act of hosting recreational activities alongside business sessions blurs the line between legitimate relationship-building and potential bribery or undue influence. Although Hacker claims that the purpose of the conference is to explain products and gather client needs, critics argue that the social and recreational aspects could be viewed as efforts to sway corporate judgments through hospitality (Crane & Matten, 2016).

There are a variety of alternative courses of action for Amberson. First, the company could prohibit attendance at such events, emphasizing transparency and ethical standards in supplier relationships. Second, if attendance continues, strict policies should be established requiring full disclosure of all gifts and expenses, coupled with limits on acceptance of hospitality. Third, Amberson could shift towards developing clearer corporate policies that prohibit accepting gifts or paid leisure activities from vendors or clients, aligning with best practices in corporate ethics and governance (Sethi, 2018). An alternative approach involves establishing internal review processes to assess the appropriateness of participation in such events, ensuring decisions are made based on consistent ethical principles rather than personal relationships or perceived benefits.

As the Corporate Governance Officer, I would advocate for a policy that outright discourages accepting expensive gifts or entertainment from suppliers to prevent conflicts of interest. This approach aligns with the ethical framework of duty-based ethics, which emphasizes adhering to moral norms such as honesty, fairness, and integrity (Kant, 1785/2013). Additionally, stakeholder theory supports prioritizing the interests of all stakeholders, rather than privileged relationships that favor specific suppliers (Freeman et al., 2010). Implementing a transparent, consistent policy against gifts and paid excursions would reinforce trust in corporate decision-making, uphold the company's reputation, and comply with legal and ethical standards.

This decision is also supported by utilitarian principles that focus on promoting the greatest good for the greatest number, which in this context means maintaining an ethical, fair, and trustworthy business environment. Eliminating the potential influence of hospitality-based incentives minimizes corruption risks and fosters a culture of integrity that benefits the entire organization (Mill, 1863/2008). Furthermore, adopting a formal code of conduct aligned with ethical standards will guide employees and management in making sound judgments, thus strengthening corporate governance structures.

In conclusion, the ethical approach that best supports the decision to discourage attendance at paid conferences with leisure components is rooted in principles of fairness, transparency, and integrity. Upholding these values ensures that Amberson maintains a reputation for ethical conduct, fosters trust among stakeholders, and complies with evolving standards of corporate responsibility. While building relationships with key suppliers is essential for business success, it must be balanced against the imperative to avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of impropriety.

References

• Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford University Press.
• Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge University Press.
• Kant, I. (2013). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. (T. K. Abbott, Trans.). Yale University Press. (Original work published 1785)
• Mill, J. S. (2008). Utilitarianism. (G. Sher, Ed.). Hackett Publishing. (Original work published 1863)
• Sethi, S. P. (2018). Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility: Why Giants Fall. Routledge.