Search results

The contribution of the present case lies in the critical view that every business actor should exercise – be it general manager, middle management, supervisor or executive – when building a strong organizational culture in corrupt political environments.

The purpose of this case study is to explore the dilemma in which Marcelo Odebrecht, once CEO of Odebrecht, found/determined whether to continue with the business model established by the founders of Odebrecht or take a new path for the organization. After exploring the corrupt acts of Odebrecht and the scope of Operation Lava Jato, the reader can reflect on the importance of organizational culture (according to the three levels proposed by Schein) in the face of the emergence of corruption. By generating discussions about organizational culture, business ethics, political culture and corruption, the organizational culture of Odebrecht is problematized in relation to its real behavior.

Students of administration, business and international business undergraduates and graduates, as well as members of senior management in companies in the infrastructure sector. Also, given the plurality of possible readings, it is recommended that the case also be used in courses or specializations in organizational psychology, organizational sociology or organizational anthropology.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

CSS 5: International Business.

This case is the second of a three-part series that follows the managerial, strategic, and communications decisions of the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) or Clean India Mission, the flagship programme of the Government of India to eliminate the practice of open defecation (i.e., not using a toilet) from 2014 to 2019. As of 2014, 550 million people in India practiced open defecation. This problem posed a massive public health hazard and economic drag for the country as well as a threat to global health. Written from an insider's perspective, the cases centre on the decisions made by a new Secretary of India's Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, who was hired to manage SBM, and the team he assembled. Case B discusses the start-up challenges for SBM, including implementation in India's complex federal system, workplace culture, and the deep-rooted behaviour of open defecation in rural India and the managerial and communication strategies formulated to address them. The case concludes by framing the difficulties with slow-moving states and monitoring rigour that the leadership SBM, with a new team, strategic focus, and early momentum, faced as the mission entered its final two years.

“Jessica’s dilemma: honesty or loyalty” is the true story of a Staff Accountant, Jessica, who discovered embezzlement by the controller, Michael. Jessica worked at a US subsidiary of a multinational organization. One of the company’s vendors contacted Jessica regarding unpaid invoices. Following up on the inquiry, Jessica found suspicious manual journal entries in the general ledger. When she questioned her boss, Michael, about her findings, he first denied the situation, then blamed another employee, and ultimately tried to intimidate Jessica so that she would not press the issue. Jessica’s investigation led to the discovery that Michael had been embezzling money from the company. To complicate matters, Jessica and her husband had a close relationship with Michael and his wife outside the office. Jessica had to make a choice between being loyal to a family friend and being honest and loyal toward her employer.

The authors obtained the information for this case from the staff accountant and her husband via a series of interviews. The information was verified via publicly available news articles on the presented case. Additionally, legal documents, which were publicly available, were also used for information. The name of the company and the names of the individuals in the case were changed to protect the identities and privacy of the involved parties.

An instructor can use this case in business ethics, introductory management, human resource law or accounting courses targeting undergraduate or introductory MBA students. This case is best used in the beginning of the suggested courses, as the instructor introduces ethical dilemmas, ethical frameworks, and stakeholder theory. The case is designed so that students do not need a background in business or business ethics to be able to successfully complete the case analysis. Additionally, the case provides a platform to discuss the differences in an ethical vs an unethical manager and how to respond to such a situation.

Many employees are afraid to report ethical wrongdoing to upper management, or to engage in ethical dissent. When upper management is receptive to reports of wrongdoing, ethical dissent within the organization to upper-level management has more organizational benefits than when the issue is shared with coworkers or external agencies. This is because upper management has the power to make a difference in the situation and may be able to keep the situation within the organization to eliminate possible reputation problems for the organization. The presented case can be utilized to discuss the importance of feeling safe in an organization as it pertains to reporting wrongdoing within the organization and how organizational culture and leadership can enhance or diminish that feeling.

The cases describe the demise of Arthur Andersen, a firm that had long set the industry standard for professionalism in accounting and auditing. Once an example of strong corporate culture with a commitment to public service and independent integrity, Andersen saw its culture and standards weaken as it grew explosively and changed its mode of governance. The (A) case describes a crisis precipitated by the admission of Waste Management, a major Andersen client, that it overstated its pretax earnings by $1.43 billion from 1992 to 1996. The resulting Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation ended with Andersen paying a $7 million fine, the largest ever levied against an accounting firm, and agreeing to an injunction that effectively placed the accounting giant on probation. Students analyze the causes of Andersen's problems and advise Andersen leadership. The (B) case covers Arthur Andersen's relationship with Enron, one of the great success stories of the “new economy” boom. When Enron's aggressive use of off-balance sheet partnerships became impossible to hide in autumn 2001, news reports stated that Andersen auditors had engaged in extensive shredding of draft documents and associated communications with Enron. Students are asked to act as crisis management consultants to Andersen CEO Joe Berardino. The (C) case details Andersen's collapse following its indictment and conviction on criminal charges of obstructing justice in the Enron case. Its conviction was later overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court on narrow technical grounds, but by then Andersen had ceased to exist, eighty-nine years after Arthur E. Andersen had taken over a small accounting firm in Chicago. Students can focus on the impact of media on a reputational crisis.

Students will: Identify the teachable moment in a crisis that leaders can leverage as an opportunity to improve a firm's reputation or core identity, to reinforce values, and to drive change, Understand the impact on crisis management of the media landscape and regulatory decision-making, Realize the fragility of corporate cultures and the need to actively maintain them, especially during difficult times,

In the 1990s, Mike Flanagan foresaw video moving from analog to digital and developed an equipment rental business to meet the needs of the entertainment/media production industry. By 1996 he established a second company to offer training in the use of Avid, a digital video-editing program. Flanagan sold the rental business in 1998 and by 2002 expanded the training away from a business model to a full-fledged college business model. By 2014 what started as a successful training program developed into a negative interaction with the US Department of Education and Flanagan found himself being forced out of business.

This case was originally a client-based project conducted real time in an MBA-level marketing course at the Graziadio School of Business and Management at Pepperdine University.

The case is well suited for a variety of business and law courses that integrate ethical decision making in their curriculum at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The case allows for a greater understanding of the implications of managerial behavior tied to ethical beliefs and the possible outcomes that may result. It also allows for a stronger grasp of the integral nature of management, staff, consumers and outside organizations on the pervasive impact of non-ethical behavior. Last, this case creates a framework for students to assess how ethics influence managerial behavior that will affect an organization’s success.

What ethical duties and obligations does a business owe to its customers and other stakeholders? Is ignorance an excuse for failing to meet those ethical obligations?

In November 2005 Fidelity Homestead, a savings bank in Louisiana, began noticing suspicious charges from Mexico and southern California on its customers' credit cards. More than a year later, an audit revealed peculiarities in the credit card data in the computer systems of TJX Companies, the parent company of more than 2,600 discount fashion and home accessories retail stores in the United States, Canada, and Europe.

The U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Justice Department, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police found that hackers had penetrated TJX's systems in mid-2005, accessing information that dated as far back as 2003. TJX had violated industry security standards by failing to update its in-store wireless networks and by storing credit card numbers and expiration dates without adequate encryption. When TJX announced the intrusion in January 2007, it admitted that hackers had compromised nearly 46 million debit and credit card numbers, the largest-ever data breach in the United States.

After analyzing and discussing the case, students should be able to:

• Understand imbedded operational risks

• Analyze how operational risk decisions are made in a firm

• Understand the challenges in the electronic payment transmission process, which relies on each participant in the process to operate best-in-class safety systems to ensure the safety of the entire process

• Recognize the sophistication of IT security threats

Understand imbedded operational risks

Analyze how operational risk decisions are made in a firm

Understand the challenges in the electronic payment transmission process, which relies on each participant in the process to operate best-in-class safety systems to ensure the safety of the entire process

Recognize the sophistication of IT security threats

This case involves a real-life Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Sir Allen Stanford, a man who bribed Antiguan regulators and a certified public accountant firm to perpetuate his scam. The case includes the process of making victims whole, which involves a court-initiated clawback process: taking back payouts to investors or charities to redistribute the funds to other fraud victims who did not receive their fair payout. Students apply theory learned in an upper-level fraud or forensic accounting course. Finally, the case addresses the aftermath of a fraud scheme.

Ponzi schemes – one of the most common types of investment fraud – have caused investors to lose billions of dollars. Because of the prevalence of Ponzi schemes and the ramifications to investors, it is important for business students to understand the nature of these schemes and to learn how to recognize them. As future business professionals, students will be charged with recognizing a Ponzi scheme early and uncovering it before investors lose their investments.

This case is designed for upper-level undergraduate students or graduate students taking a fraud or forensic accounting course, which is best introduced after professors cover Ponzi schemes and also these concepts: fraud triangle, fraud diamond and fraud red flags.

The case deals with comparison of two events namely Bhopal Gas Tragedy and BP Oil Spill Tragedy. Specifically, the case compares the negotiation process and its outcome. In other words, the case compares how negotiation was carried out on behalf of victims of these tragedies and resulted in optimal outcomes in one situation and sub-optimal outcomes in another situation. It case also provides insights into cross-cultural issues in negotiation process as one of the events took place in emerging economy (India) and other one in a developed economy (USA). The case gives insight for individuals on how handle communication process during the course of negotiation.

This case examines the ethical issues raised when businesses contract for the military during time of war. Dow Chemical Company was a military contractor during the Vietnam War and the primary producer of Agent Orange - a defoliant used to clear vegetation. Agent Orange has been linked to a number of serious medical conditions in war veterans and Vietnamese civilians. In 2004, Vietnamese citizens filed suit against Dow for illnesses they believe were caused by exposure to Agent Orange. Dow thought the issue should have been addressed through political and social policy, while Vietnamese citizens and U.S. Vietnam war veterans believed Dow was ethically responsible. As the case moved through the U.S. judicial system, some of Dow's investors grew uncomfortable with how it was handled. Dow CEO Andrew Liveris was left to wonder what his company could have done differently and what they could learn from the Agent Orange episode that might prevent similar problems in the future. This incident appeared to be a relatively distinct case, but in July of 2007 it was reported that the number of private contract employees in Iraq exceeded that of U.S. military personnel. Consequently, it is likely that companies and their stakeholders will have to address similar issues.

The case uses primary source documents, such as the court cases brought forth by the SEC and US District Attorney, for the specifics about the fraud and secondary sources for further background information about the town and industry. The individuals in the case are not disguised. The authors have no connection to the case.

Thomas Laws was a CPA, a registered investment advisor and a real estate broker. Laws made a poor business investment. Instead of taking the financial hit, Laws orchestrated a complex Ponzi scheme using clients from his CPA practice and embezzling money from an employer, Santa Fe Gold Corporation. Laws’ scheme continued until his employer confronted him about missing funds. Frank Mueller, the CFO of Santa Fe, did not exercise the due diligence necessary until it was too late. Rest’s framework for ethical decision making is used to frame the ethical decisions Mueller can make. The case examines the conflict-of-interest guidance issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and allows students to examine the due diligence and controls needed by employers and prospective investors.

This case is designed for undergraduate accounting students taking Intermediate Accounting I, ACCT 0312 at the authors’ institution, typically junior-level students. It would be appropriate whenever you introduce the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct during an ethics discussion.