Help Answer The Following Question From Boatright J And Smit

Help Answer The Following Question From Boatright J And Smith Jd

Help answer the following question from: Boatright, J. and Smith, J.D. (2017). Ethics and the Conduct of Business. (8th ed.). Pearson. ISBN: CH. 5 What is the meaning of conflict of interest; the different types of conflict of interest, and how can businesses manage these situations? CH.11 What are the ethical issues raised by the various hostile takeover defense tactics, and what do they suggest about the rights and fiduciary duties of officers and directors? Text is not furnish. Please cite reference in your answer what page. Be as detail as possible, cite page number and use the text cited: Boatright, J. and Smith, J.D. (2017). Ethics and the Conduct of Business. (8th ed.).

Pearson. ISBN. Using APA format Sample example has been supplied

Paper For Above instruction

Conflicts of interest are situations where an individual or organization has multiple interests, and serving one interest could potentially conflict with the duty to serve the other interests. As Boatright and Smith (2017, p. 150) describe, a conflict of interest arises when personal interests interfere with the professional duties owed to an organization or clients, potentially leading to biased decision-making that benefits oneself at the expense of others who rely on impartiality. These conflicting interests can threaten the integrity of business transactions and the fairness of decision-making processes.

There are several types of conflicts of interest identified in the literature. The most common are self-dealing, where an individual benefits personally from a transaction or decision that they influence; and outside interests, where personal relationships or external investments might influence professional judgments. Boatright and Smith (2017, p. 152-153) also identify conflicts of interest arising from fiduciary duties, where officers or directors might prioritize personal gains over their obligations to shareholders or stakeholders. Managing these conflicts involves transparency, disclosure, and the implementation of policies that limit or supervise situations where conflicts could occur.

Effective management of conflicts of interest requires organizations to develop clear policies that mandate disclosure of any potential conflicts, establish procedures for recusal from decision-making processes where conflicts exist, and foster an organizational culture that emphasizes ethical behavior. Boatright and Smith (2017, p. 155) emphasize that transparency and accountability are essential strategies to mitigate the risks associated with conflicts of interest. Regular training and ethical oversight by boards or compliance officers can further reinforce appropriate handling. In some cases, conflicts of interest are unavoidable, but proactive management can minimize their impact on ethical decision-making.

Turning to hostile takeover defense tactics, they raise substantial ethical issues concerning the rights and duties of officers and directors. As discussed in Boatright and Smith (2017, p. 322), tactics such as poison pills, staggered boards, and golden parachutes can act as barriers to takeovers but may also be used to entrench management or protect entrenched interests rather than serve the best interests of shareholders. These tactics pose ethical questions about whether they are justified under fiduciary duties to maximize shareholder value or if they serve personal or managerial interests at the expense of transparency and fairness.

The ethical considerations include determining whether the defensive measures are justified by genuine concerns about long-term stability versus serving the self-interest of management. Boatright and Smith (2017, p. 324) argue that officers and directors owe fiduciary duties primarily to shareholders, which requires acting in their best interests. When takeover defenses impede shareholder rights or decision-making, they can be viewed as conflicting with these fiduciary duties. Ethical decision-making in this context necessitates balancing protections for the company with transparency and honoring shareholders’ rights.

Overall, these issues illustrate the complex dilemmas faced by corporate officers and directors when deploying hostile takeover defenses. While such tactics can sometimes be justified to protect the firm, they must be scrutinized for their ethical implications. Transparent communication with shareholders and adherence to fiduciary duties are critical; failure to do so can harm stakeholder trust and undermine the ethical standards of corporate governance (Boatright & Smith, 2017, pp. 322-324).

References

• Boatright, J., & Smith, J. D. (2017). Ethics and the Conduct of Business (8th ed.). Pearson.