Academic Library
Home Register Login FAQ Contact Us Logout

Ethics In Business

TitleEthics In Business
# of Words2279
# of Pages (250 words per page double spaced)9.12

Ethics in Business



Ethics in Business

From a business perspective, working under government contracts can be a
very lucrative proposition. In general, a stream of orders keep coming in,
revenue increases and the company grows in the aggregate. The obvious downfalls
to working in this manner is both higher quality expected as well as the
extensive research and documentation required for government contracts. If a
part fails to perform correctly it can cause minor glitches as well as problems
that can carry serious repercussions, such as in the National Semiconductor case.
When both the culpable component and company are found, the question arises of
how extensive these repercussions should be. Is the company as an entity liable
or do you look into individual employees within that company? From an ethical
perspective one would have to look at the mitigating factors of both the
employees and their superiors along with the role of others in the failure of
these components. Next you would have to analyze the final ruling from a
corporate perspective and then we must examine the macro issue of corporate
responsibility in order to attempt to find a resolution for cases like these.
The first mitigating factor involved in the National Semiconductor case
is the uncertainty, on the part of the employees, on the duties that they were
assigned. It is plausible that during the testing procedure, an employee couldnt
distinguish which parts they were to test under government standards and
commercial standards. In some cases they might have even been misinformed on the
final consumers of the products that they tested. In fact, ignorance on the part
of the employees would fully excuse them from any moral responsibility for any
damage that may result from their work. Whether it is decided that an employees
is fully excused, or is given some moral responsibility, would have to be looked
at on an individual basis.
The second mitigating factor is the duress or threats that an employee
might suffer if they do not follow through with their assignment. After the
bogus testing was completed in the National Semiconductor labs, the
documentation department also had to falsify documents stating that the parts
had surpassed the governmental testing standards. From a legal and ethical
standpoint, both the testers and the writers of the reports were merely acting
as agents on direct orders from a superior. This was also the case when the
plant in Singapore refused to falsify the documents and were later falsified by
the employees at the have California plant before being submitted to the
approval committees (Velazquez, 53). The writers of the reports were well aware
of the situation yet they acted in this manner on the instruction of a
supervisor. Acting in an ethical manner becomes a secondary priority in this
type of environment. As stated by Alan Reder, . . . if they [the employees]
feel they will suffer retribution, if they report a problem, they arent too
likely to open their mouths. (113). The workers knew that if the reports were
not falsified they would come under questioning and perhaps their employment
would go into jeopardy. Although working under these conditions does not fully
excuse an employees from moral fault, it does start the divulging process for
determining the order of the chain of command of superiors and it helps to
narrow down the person or department that issued the original request for the
unethical acts.
The third mitigating factor is one that perhaps encompasses the majority
of the employees in the National Semiconductor case. We have to balance the
direct involvement that each employee had with the defective parts. Thus, it has
to be made clear that many of the employees did not have a direct duty with the
testing departments or with the parts that eventually failed. Even employees, or
sub-contractors, that were directly involved with the production were not aware
of the incompetence on the part of the testing department. For example, the
electrical engineer that desig

This is ONLY a preview of the article. If you would like to view the entire document, you must subscribe to Academic Library. Please register below now!

Subscribe to Academic Library

When you subscribe to the Academic Library, you get 24-hour access to the online database containing full-text articles written by thousands of scholarly students. For only $8.95 per month, you receive unlimited monthly access to view and download all of our 40,000 articles available online. That is less than the price of one textbook!

This price includes:
  • 24-hours-a-day, 7 days a week unlimited access on any computer with Internet access
  • Complete access to all 40,000 articles, essays, and research papers
  • Ability to view and download virtually unlimited number of documents
  • Ability to browse through perfectly arranged catalog of articles
  • Superior search and relevancy ranking techniques using Google SiteSearch and our local search engine
  • Instant access to the online database after registration

You can pay by credit card, checking account. You get instant access after registration:

You will be billed $ 8.95 every 30 days (recurring billing) starting on the day you subscribe.
Your credit card will automatically be renewed for your convenience until you cancel.

If you are already registered, please click here to login.


Home | Register | Login | FAQ | Forgot Password | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Close Account | Contact Us | Logout

Copyright 1998-2009 Academic Library. Academic Library is designed only to assist students and researchers in the preparation of their own work. Anybody who use our services are responsible not only for writing their own papers, but also for citing Academic Library as a source when doing so. By accessing and using this page you agree to the Disclaimer.

If you wish to cancel your subscription to Academic Library, please click here.