Scenario Summary: Dr. Susie Wang Is President Of A Subsidiar

Scenario Summarydr Susie Wang Is President Of A Subsidiary Of The

Dr. Susie Wang is president of a subsidiary of the world’s largest concrete machine manufacturer (REESE, Inc.). Her job is to organize and operate a newly formed global business consulting company (Concrete Network Services, i.e., CNS) comprising 13 divisions related to the concrete industry. REESE Inc. CEO, Curtis Davis, tasked CNS with capturing hidden opportunities and potential global sales for REESE. Although CNS is legally a subsidiary of REESE, it has been designed to operate publicly as a separate entity with a different name and location. The presidents of other REESE companies—Chris Warner, Ray Kronk, Eric Downs, Harry Potkins, and Sam Jones—support the CEO’s desire for CNS not to appear linked to REESE. These company presidents and the CEO form REESE’s Executive Team.

REESE Inc. hosted 20 Chinese dignitaries and the owner of Beijing’s largest construction firm for a tour of U.S. REESE plants. During the event, the Executive Team and Dr. Wang were present. The Dean of the University of Michigan’s architectural school presented a plan to partner with REESE and the Chinese government to establish a satellite architectural unit in Beijing. The Chinese guests expressed enthusiasm, viewing the partnership as a way to cement a deal with REESE. REESE executives verbally supported this initiative, and the University of Michigan representatives returned to Ann Arbor confident of REESE’s commitment. However, months later, Dr. Wang learned that REESE had backed out of the deal immediately after receiving a large machine order, and she accused herself of being used.

Paper For Above instruction

The case involving REESE Inc., Dr. Susie Wang, and the associated business dealings presents multiple ethical considerations concerning corporate conduct, transparency, and cultural sensitivity. Analyzing these issues requires understanding the ethical principles involved, the organizational culture, and the leadership approach demonstrated, along with recognizing the nature of the ethical dilemma.

Adherence to Business Ethics by REESE Inc.

RESESE Inc. appears to have lacked alignment with fundamental business ethics, particularly in transparency and honesty. Ethical business practices emphasize honesty in dealings, transparency in intentions, and respect for stakeholders. The company’s deliberate effort to conceal its relationship with CNS and its apparent deception in the China partnership reflect a breach of these principles. Instead of being forthright about their intentions or potential plans, REESE’s strategy of appearing as a detached entity to the public and to international partners indicates a prioritization of corporate image and strategic advantage over honesty. According to the ethical standards proposed by Freeman (1984), responsible corporate behavior entails integrity and truthfulness in communications with stakeholders. REESE’s actions, therefore, seem inconsistent with these standards. To better align with ethical practices, I would recommend REESE adopt a set of core values centered around transparency, integrity, and respect—treating stakeholders, including international partners, with honesty and openness.

Ethical Issues and Their Resolution

The core ethical issues involve deception, misrepresentation, and exploitation of trust. REESE’s decision to retract from the partnership after securing a large order demonstrates a breach of trust and promises made to the Chinese partners, which could damage its reputation and stakeholder relationships. Additionally, the use of cultural symbols, gifts, and social events to forge partnerships borders on ethical concerns about manipulation and superficial relationship-building. Developing a plan to address these issues requires establishing a comprehensive ethics framework that emphasizes honesty, fair dealings, cultural sensitivity, and accountability. Such a plan should include ethical training for executives, strict internal policies on transparency, and mechanisms for stakeholders to voice concerns or complaints. Transparency and accountability must be prioritized to rebuild trust if damaged, and leadership should exemplify ethical conduct to foster an organizational culture committed to integrity.

Role of the CNS President in Ethical Decision-Making

As president of CNS, Dr. Wang was confronted with conflicting directives: support her CEO’s strategic goals while maintaining ethical integrity. Ideally, she should have advocated for open communication and transparency, especially regarding international partnerships. When faced with the CEO’s directive to participate in a deceptive presentation or partnership arrangement, Dr. Wang could have requested clarification, expressed ethical concerns, and proposed alternative strategies that align with ethical standards. Her role involves acting as both an organizational leader and an ethical steward, ensuring decisions do not compromise integrity or stakeholder trust. Ultimately, she should have aligned her actions with ethical principles, prioritizing honesty and the company's reputation over short-term strategic gains.

Ethical Dilemma Characterization

This scenario constitutes an ethical dilemma because Dr. Wang was caught between conflicting choices: adhere to the CEO’s directives, which involved misleading partners, or uphold ethical standards of honesty and integrity. The dilemma centers on whether to follow directives that may compromise ethical standards for strategic advantage or to challenge these directives, risking professional repercussions. Ethical dilemmas often involve competing values, such as loyalty versus honesty, or business interests versus moral principles. In this case, the decision to support or oppose the deceptive practices directly affects personal integrity, corporate reputation, and stakeholder trust, exemplifying a classic ethical dilemma in corporate leadership.

Implications for Organizational Culture and Leadership

This case reflects an organizational culture that emphasizes strategic competitiveness and secrecy over transparency. Leadership appears to prioritize corporate image and market advantage, sometimes at the expense of ethical considerations. Such a culture can foster attitudes that justify deception or superficial relationships, undermining trust internally and externally. Effective leadership rooted in ethical principles can transform this culture by promoting openness, accountability, and respect. Leaders influence organizational values, and their behavior sets the tone for ethical conduct throughout the company. In this scenario, leadership’s emphasis on strategic secrecy over transparency risks damaging long-term sustainability, employee morale, and stakeholder confidence. Ethical leadership that models integrity can cultivate a corporate environment conducive to responsible decision-making and trust-building.

Philosophical Approaches to Ethics Reflected

Among the philosophical approaches to ethics described in Chapter 4, the most apparent view represented by REESE’s actions aligns with utilitarianism—focused on maximizing strategic advantage and shareholder value—at the expense of ethical considerations like honesty. Utilitarianism assesses the morality of actions based on their outcomes, often justifying deceit if it results in greater overall benefit to the organization. Conversely, a deontological approach, emphasizing duty and adherence to moral rules regardless of outcomes, would oppose deceptive practices. The case suggests that REESE prioritized outcomes that favored short-term gains over ethical duties, indicating a utilitarian or consequentialist orientation. Such an approach risks long-term damage to reputation and stakeholder relationships, highlighting the importance of balancing strategic goals with ethical responsibilities.

Conclusion

The REESE case underscores the critical importance of integrating ethical standards into corporate strategy and leadership. Transparency, honesty, and respect are foundational to sustainable business practices, especially in international dealings where cultural sensitivity is essential. Ethical dilemmas require careful navigation, emphasizing the need for organizational cultures that value integrity over short-term gains. Leaders must set a moral example, fostering trust and responsible decision-making, which ultimately support the company's long-term success and reputation.

References

• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman Publishing.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). Moral Courage: Taking Action When Your Values Are Threatened. HarperOne.
• Bowen, F. (2013). Organizational Culture and Ethical Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 305-317.
• Giacalone, R. A., & Thompson, R. A. (2013). Ethical Leadership and Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 693-702.
• Schwartz, M. S. (2017). Organizational culture and ethics. Business Horizons, 60(1), 21-29.
• Treviño, L. K., & Nelson, K. A. (2017). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do It Right. Wiley Publishing.
• Henning, S. (2010). Corporate ethical leadership: The challenge of change. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(3), 465-488.
• Sims, R. R. (1992). The challenge of ethical behavior in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 535-548.
• Joshi, M., & Kale, S. (2019). Ethics in Organizational Leadership: Strategies for Building Ethical Culture. International Journal of Business Ethics, 12(4), 300-312.
• Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in global governance: Effects on corporate social responsibility and ethics. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899-931.