Q1. Carry out a Stakeholder analysis of the situation described in “Industrial Accident At Seth Rayon Ltd”
|Stakeholder |Characteristics |Main |Actions taken by share holder |Fear, interest, expectation due|Recommended Action |
| | |interests | |to this incident | |
|State Environment Protection |Policy makers & environment |To provide with policies & work setup |Stated that the mixture of gas |Company’s unit require up |Periodic inspection of the plant by |
|Board (SEPB) |regulators |requirements for safeguarding the |released is harmful |gradation to effectively handle|SEPB and compliance with the safety |
| | |environment |Gave recommendations how to improve |the effluent waste in case of |norms |
| | | |the factory unit |power or emergency break downs.| |
| | | |To monitor BOD, COD & pH levels | | |
| | | |Recommended for autopsies be studied | | |
| | | |for correct treatment | | |
|Local Residents |Public residing in the area |To have safe & healthy environment in |There were injuries & deaths to the |General public feared with the |Local residents should be briefed and |
| |near by the factory |the area they live |general public. |discharge of harmful effluents |given emergency evacuation procedural |
| | | |Loss of livestock & poultry. |impacting the air due to which |drills. |
| | | | |there was health hazard. | |
|Three Consultants |Hired for certifying |To certify that the effluents from the |Consultants blamed other companies |They may lose their client that|Consultants should bring out the truth |
| | |company are safe |for chemical discharge in the nullah.|is Seth Rayon ltd. if they do |to the public |
| | | | |not support the company’s view.| |
|State Government |Authority to implement laws & |To safeguard the interest of the public|Arrested four top officials of the |Feared outcry by general public|State government should be stringent in |
| |policies at state level |of the said state |company. |about the hazardous discharge. |implementing and enforcing the laws |
| | | |Ordered for shutting down the unit |Maintain check and balance |keeping a check on any defaults in |
| | | |until safety measures are in place |between workers’ union demands |future. |
| | | |Ordered closure of plant on SEPB |of not closing the plant. | |
| | | |findings, which led to protests by | | |
| | | |workers’ union. | | |
| | | |State government allowed to opn the | | |
| | | |plant after a week based on | | |
| | | |inspection by SEPB and compliance | | |
| | | |with passed by SEPB or by the state | | |
| | | |government | | |
|Central Government(includes |Authority to implement laws & |To safeguard the interest of the public|Centre asserted that state government|They may lose their power in |They should enact strict law to punish |
|Central Law ministry ) |policies |& society at large |would pursue further actions |the centre so they transferred |the guilty and the environment norms |
| | | | |the authority to state |should be updated periodically based on |
| | | | |government and feared to give |the situation. |
| | | | |any comments. | |
|Workers union |Appointed by workers across |To safeguard interests of workers |Workers’ union threatened for |Demanded for plant to remain |They should be made aware of the |
| |other factories |employed in various factories in the |industrial unrest. |open and operational |situation at hand and should judge |
| | |region | | |themselves before going for protest. |
|Local Commercial |Dependent on operations of the |To get continuous support from the |Due to this incident plant was going |Plant not to be closed | |
|Establishments |factory |factory |to be closed for six months which | | |
| | | |would impact on their running | | |
|Suppliers |Dependent on operations of the |Require Seth Rayon Ltd. to be its |None |Plant not to be closed so as to| |
| |factory |customer and buy their products | |sell their products & services | |
| | | | |to Seth Rayon Ltd. | |
|State electricity board |Provide electricity supply to |None |Provided automatic switch over to the|None |Commercial lines should be given |
| |the factory | |state power grid supply in event of | |priority. |
| | | |breakdown | | |

Q2. Perform a critical ethical analysis of the actions of the company and the government participants in “Industrial Accident At Seth Rayon Ltd”.
Ethical Analysis
|Action |Ethical Problem |Alternatives |Recommended Action |
|Company officials and employees worked on power |Company focused on restoring power and production |Equal importance to both power supply restoration |The possible action could be they should have gone |
|supply problem. |facilities while they completely ignored the |and effluent discharge problem. |for alternative 3 mentioned above keeping in view |
| |effluent discharge problem due to overflow of |They should have informed and called experts from |the practical constraints. As effluent had already |
| |chemicals in the system leading to hazardous mixture|electricity board for power restoration. |got discharged in the canal and had reacted with |
| |of gas in the atmosphere. |They should have alerted general public living |other chemicals producing hazardous gas. This would |
| | |nearby and informed the government authorities to |have saved people’s lives & injuries which they |
| | |help them take corrective measures as soon as |suffered due to toxic gas. |
| | |possible. | |
|Company hired consultants to certify that its |Company should have accepted its negligence in |They should have accepted their mistake and worked |Company should go with alternative. By doing this |
|effluents were safe and that the toxic gas was |monitoring the effluent discharge instead of blaming|out a way to deal with the situation with the help |they would accept the mistake and work with SEPB in |
|formed only due to the reaction with other chemicals|other factories for toxic gas mixture formation. |of SEPB & other factories in the area. |improvising their waste treatment systems and in |
|in the nullah suggesting that the fault also lay in |Company was lacking in waste treatment facilities | |future taken care of the effective treatment of |
|part with all other factories that drained their |and it violated safety norms given by SEPB. | |effluents. This would help company in regaining |
|effluents into the canal. | | |faith amongst the general public for their factory |
| | | |and it’s working. |
|Company took legal position and forced to prove | |Company should not have taken the legal position and|Company should go for alternative . This would help |
|charge of negligence and demanded to continue |Company tried to hide their mistake in handling the |instead work on putting up corrective measures in |them improve the systems for future operations and |
|operation till such time. |crisis situation and not to work upon the change and|place for future operations of the company |put robust system in place for effluent treatment. |
| |full implementation of safety norms in its factory. | | |
| |Also, company tried to operate with poor systems in | | |
| |place even after knowing about the faulty systems in| | |
| |place. | | |
|Company went into damage control mode by providing |Company at one place rejected and did not accept its|Since they were responsible for the mistake they should pay the compensation. |
|excess compensation to the victims’ families. |mistake while on the other hand it paid compensation| |
| |money to victims’ families. In one way company | |
| |contradicted itself from its previous actions. | |
|State Government ordered closure of the plant and a |Government allowed the company to start the |Government should have allowed the company to begin the operation after ensuring that the safety systems |
|week later they allowed the company to start the |operations without any changes in the existing |are installed to prevent the accidents. This action would have improved the company safety standards. |
|operations due of the workers union protest |factory system. They did not force the company to | |
| |install updated system in place to prevent similar | |
| |accidents in future. The government never followed | |
| |the environment norms by allowing the company to | |
| |operate. | |

Q3. Carry out stakeholder analysis of the situation described in “problems at Seth group”?

|Stakeholder |Characteristics |Main |Actions taken |Interests, |Recommended Action |
| | |interests | |fears, | |
| | | | |expectations | |
|General public |Have indirect interest in the |Promote the general welfare of all the |Voiced their protest during the |General public wants the company |Public awareness should increase |
| |company’s actions |people |television interview. |to act in an ethical way |with respect to company affairs. |
| Consultants |Hired to assess the company’s |To give a proper performance evaluation |Maekyl, a consultant put in writing |They feared the company might |Report and the recommendations |
| |performance |and recommend actions to the management |what he should not have. |cancel their consulting contract |should be kept confidential. |
|Government |Authority to implement laws & |To safeguard the interest of the public. |They failed to check the PAML terrorist|To promote the conditions in |Government should check |
| |policies at state level | |activities. |favor of business. |corruption in their departments |
| | | | | |and actions should be taken for |
| | | | | |PAML eradication. |
|Workers union |Appointed by workers across other|To safeguard interests of workers |They protested against the company |They feared PAML interference in |The worker union should force the|
| |factories |employed in various factories in the |participation in the auction. |the factory operations |management to stop their covert |
| | |region | | |support for PAML. |
|PAML |Terrorist organization |Liberation movement |They murdered the CEO of LaZaCo |They exhorted money from various |They should have adopted the |
| | | | |organizations in palarashtra |non-violence activities to |
| | | | | |achieve their goals |
|Management |Decision making authority |Profitability |They submitted falsified documents to |They have fear for PAML. |They should have maintained |
| | | |the court. |They wanted to make unusual |ethical standards. |
| | | |They acquired companies with no value |profit from the operations in | |
| | | |The manipulated accounting to show |palarashtra | |
| | | |profit at the cost of shareholders. |They wanted to shape the public | |
| | | |They covertly supported PAML activites.|opinion favorably towards the | |
| | | |They participated in the auction to |company | |
| | | |strengthen their relationship eith |They want a favorable judgment in| |
| | | |palarashtra government |the case. | |
| | | |They threatened the media to influence |They went for diversification | |
| | | |their reporting | | |
| | | |They were biased in their promoting | | |
| | | |policies | | |

Q4. Perform a critical ethical analysis of the Seth group top management in “problems at Seth group”?

|Action |Ethical Problem |Alternatives |Recommended Action |
|Firing the old mangers (satraps) |At the time of takeover, Tarang Seth, CEO faced had conflict of | Tarang Seth could have discussed his point of view on the distribution of control within the |
| |interest with the old managers (satraps) as to who should have |management and reached a amicable solution. |
| |the control over decision making of the company affairs. | |
|Filing of falsified documents with the court |Company showed a selfish motive by providing falsified documents|Khan should have been more diligent in performing his duties and should have verified all the |
| |to the court and then giving the excuse that this was an |documents before submitting to the court or for that matter disclosing to any outside party |
| |innocent mistake. | |
|Giving expensive gifts, such as a bottle of scotch, |Again they were being selfish and creating the environment of |company should have followed the ethics and policies while giving gifts to the stakeholders |
|to equity analysts in order to influence them |corruption by giving expensive gifts to their equity | |
| |researchers. | |
|Writing off previous years losses with share premium |Company being under the competitive pressure decided to write |company should have shown a true picture rather than glorifying the books by just a mere |
|account in order to improve shareholder returns |off their losses with the share premium account thus showing the|adjustment and thus keeping its shareholders in dark |
| |profits in their books at the cost of shareholders. | |
|Covertly supporting PAML and providing monetary | In order to do business in the locality of Palarashtra without |Given that PAML was a terrorist organization and being very well aware of their deeds company |
|assistance to the their personnel to strengthen their|any hindrance from local terrorist group PAML, company decided |should have not supported or transacted in any way with them |
|positions with PAML |to covertly support the organization monetarily even while | |
| |knowing that the government had banned the organization | |
|Even after CEO was murdered they participated in the |Further to be in good terms with the government and support |Company has a moral duty of supporting the fellow businesses when it comes to a common cause |
|local auction to be in good terms with Palarashtra |PAML, the company decided to participate in the local auction |and should not have thought selfishly while going for the local auction. |
|government |and not supporting the other companies which decided not to | |
| |participate and oppose the cold blooded murder of a colleague by| |
| |PAML | |
|Tried to hide the defect in their low cost computers |Company decided to hide the major flaw in their new innovative |First of all the tests should have been performed before the release of the product to ensure |
|and selling them to the general public |product (low cost computer) and to go ahead with the sale to |the safety and once they have identified the problem a recall of the products should have been |
| |general public for the sake of monetary gains. Further even |ordered to avoid any further accidents |
| |after the occurrence of overheating and battery blowing up | |
| |problems, they never decided to recall their products from the | |
| |market. | |
|Changing the date of manufacturing of the goods to |In another such case company, just to reduce the wastage of |the losses occurring due to expiration of inventory goods were company`s liability and should |
|sell them in the market |expired inventory stock and thus avoid any losses, decided to |not be transferred to the customers by selling off the expired products without being |
| |change the manufacturing date of the products and release the |transparent |
| |stock in the market. | |
|Threatening the media in order to influence their |When the media was highlighting the unethical or unjust deeds of|What the media was reporting and could have reported was completely their right and company |
|reporting |the company they decided to threaten the media and influence the|could not have in any way threatened them to influence the reporting. |
| |reporting. | |
|Decision of promoting SMC trainees into higher grade |While deciding to promote the SMC Trainees company was biased in|The system of promotion should be uniform and no exceptions or favors should be done on any |
|while other qualified such as CPAs weren’t |following performance based pay and therefore not promoting the |terms or basis. |
| |CPAs who are also equally qualified. | |

Q5. Perform a critical ethical analysis of the actions of all the managers/participants in “Tales of Some Companies: Ch III & Ch IV
|Ethical Dilemma |Alternatives |Recommended action |
|Contributions for a noble cause - voluntary or by force |Inform the employees about the need to contribute and make a list of |The voluntary contribution option will be best for both the employees |
| |employees |and the organization It keeps both the identity and amount being |
| |Publish the notice in company magazine, notice board, email for the |contributed confidential. As a result the company is able to contribute|
| |need of contribution and assign a particular person willing from a |with the help of employees. |
| |building to collect the employee number and amount he/she is willing to| |
| |contribute | |
| |Assign functional managers to collect the amount which comes from a | |
| |particular function. Give the responsibility to the functional managers| |
| |to collect the amount from people working under him | |
| |Inform the employees about the need to contribute and make a list of | |
| |employees. Publish the notice in company magazine, notice board, email | |
| |for the need of contribution and assign a particular person willing | |
| |from a building to collect the employee number and amount he/she is | |
| |willing to contribute | |
|Do not do anything that you are unwilling to have it published in |To give warning to the person |It is suggested to remove the person to make an example, however |
|tomorrow’s newspaper :To remove the person from the company for |To ignore the issue as the contribution by the person is more than that|important the person may be. In long run if this practice continues it |
|fudging during reimbursement |contributed to the company |may bring in a casual approach towards reimbursement and with employee |
| |Levy heavy penalty |strength of more than 70 thousand and increasing this could actually be|
| |To remove the person as it is not an acceptable standard of the |more cost than an employee can ever contribute at any level. |
| |company. | |
|Whether to give bribe or not |Give the bribe and get the work done |It is recommended to not give the bribe as it will tarnish the image of|
| |Do not give bribe and Complaint the higher authority in government |the organization and in general will give the impression elsewhere to |
| |about the problem |ask for bribe from the same organization, when work needs to be done by|
| |and use alternative method |government or external party. |
| |Expose the issue before public | |
|To pay a percentage of extra money as new Budget was on the brink of |Wait for the Declaration of the new budget |It is recommended to get the goods cleared as soon as possible at the |
|being declared and an extra Duty would have to paid if duty on that |Pay a percentage of expected difference and get the goods cleared. |present duty rate. If not gather evidence of the goods present with |
|particular goods were to be increased. |As the Budget was not yet declared at the point of clearance, get it |customs and reason for not clearing. Later the additional Duty paid can|
| |cleared at the present duty rate, if not getting clearance, collect |be refunded by showing evidence or by excising legal steps. |
| |evidence of the goods present with the customs at that date and the | |
| |reason provided for not clearing the goods. | |