Search results
1 – 3 of 3Stephen M. Rapier, Doreen E. Shanahan, Nancy E. Dodd and Jeffrey R. Baker
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…
Abstract
Synopsis
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.
Research methodology
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.
Relevant courses and levels
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.
Theoretical bases
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?
Details
Keywords
June A. West, Gretchen A. Kalsow, Lee Fennel and Jenny Mead
Fingerhut, based in Minnetonka, Minnesota, is a direct-marketing company that sells a smorgasbord of consumer goods through an array of specially targeted catalogs. In November…
Abstract
Fingerhut, based in Minnetonka, Minnesota, is a direct-marketing company that sells a smorgasbord of consumer goods through an array of specially targeted catalogs. In November 1996, an article in the Star Tribune, a major Minneapolis newspaper, drew attention to a class-action lawsuit pending against Fingerhut that suggests the firm made its profits by exploiting the poor. Several civil rights groups rallied around the suit and submitted amicus curiae in favor of the litigation. The case illustrates issues in ethics and management communication. Discussions focus on the constituencies. Is Fingerhut exploiting its customers or providing them with an affordable method of obtaining valued consumer goods on credit? Do retailers have a duty to offer products at reasonable prices? Are the high interest rates reasonable given the risk? What are the options: pawn shops, rent-to-own? What is the profile of the typical Fingerhut customer? Discussions also focus on the issues communicating to the constituencies. How much damage will the lawsuit do to Fingerhut's image as an ethical, socially conscious company? What communication strategies can the firm employ? Should it react to the lawsuit? What should it tell its employees?
Details
Keywords
Dheeraj Sharma and Varsha Verma
Armstrong, a world famous cyclist, was charged with doping in 2012. Subsequent to this news, most of his endorsers terminated their contracts with him. Armstrong had started a…
Abstract
Armstrong, a world famous cyclist, was charged with doping in 2012. Subsequent to this news, most of his endorsers terminated their contracts with him. Armstrong had started a foundation called Livestrong (formerly Louis Armstrong Foundation), to support cancer-survivors, which depended heavily on sponsorships received by Armstrong. Despite his resignation, the foundation was fast losing its sponsorships. Armstrong was trying to find a way to reduce negative publicity and save the foundation.
Details