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.

Determine when to resolve conflict through arbitration and when to resolve conflict through the court system. Reflect upon the types of organizational misconduct and determine what behaviors constitute organizational misconduct. Argue whether the behaviors that constitute organizational misconduct are universal or may vary according to the context. Analyze whether actions that might be considered misconduct might be acceptable in certain situations and contexts. Build additional definitions of organizational misconduct that might pertain to non-Western, developed country contexts. Analyze how media and popular opinion might influence perceptions of organizational misconduct.

Carlos Mattos (he/him/his) was the founder/president/CEO of Hyundai Colombia Automotriz S.A. from 1992 to 2015. He and his company introduced the Hyundai brand to the Colombian market and made it one of the best-selling automobile brands in the nation. When the company began experiencing losses, Hyundai headquarters terminated the contract and awarded the distribution to an Ecuadorian firm.The contract between Hyundai Colombia Automotriz S.A. and Hyundai Motor Company stipulates that arbitration is the appropriate dispute mechanism. However, Mattos contemplates whether arbitration is his best option or if he should take Hyundai Motor Company to court. He also contemplates suing the Ecuadorian firm for unfair competition.As students analyze Mattos’ decision, they will determine whether the actions of the any of the parties might be considered organizational misconduct. This case is not about assigning blame. It is not about deciphering whether anyone is guilty. Instead, the case is designed to promote critical thinking about the concept of organizational misconduct. Most literature and understanding of organizational misconduct are from a Western, developed country point of view. In this case, there are three key actors, all from emerging markets. Each may have participated in some sort of misconduct, depending on how the term is defined.

This case is appropriate for advanced, undergraduate or master's level international business students in classes such as international management, intercultural management, international negotiation or business ethics.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 5: International Business.