Stakeholders by definitions are those are can be affected by an organizations actions. In this case study, the two main stakeholders are Ms. Drummond, Ted Rogers and to some extent future Rogers customers who might encounter a similar issue. Ms. Drummond is obviously affected by Rogers Wirelesses’ original decision to uphold the original charges and Ted Rogers would be affected by the actions of his representatives and the bad press generated from the event.
The issue affecting Rogers is the fraudulent use of one of their customers’ devices, resulting in the unauthorized use of their network. They also become associated with a negative press story which can damage their reputation and image to current or future users. This can also be a liability for them if this happens in the future, particularly because Ms. Drummond has set the precedent for fraudulent usage charges to be refunded. The issues affecting Ms. Drummond are obvious – the time and money she has spent handling the situation cannot be returned and she will have lost confidence in the company providing her cellular service.
I don’t believe that having tea would be appropriate in this situation. While it may seem like a nice gesture, this is not an issue that can be resolved by a light discussion over biscuits. While dealing with the legalities associated with this case, the best way to discuss any future resolutions or repayment would be with their individual lawyers in a professional setting. Having a personal meeting such as this could have implications for both parties involved, particularly as it may look as if Mr. Rogers is ‘buying’ off Ms.