Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Siemens: Just Breaking The Eleventh Commandment? (Case Study)

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

Siemens: Just Breaking the Eleventh

Commandment? (Case Study)


Q1. What are the main individual and situational factors encouraging the alleged bribery
at Siemens? which in your opinion, are the most important?

The surrounding effects of the Siemens bribery scandal from people who were directly
responsible for such unethical conduct and situational threats rendered bribery the only way to do
business, especially when dealing with poor countries and corrupt governments. And it became
apparent after going through studies that corruption was more than a way of doing the job, but
within the industry it was a corporate culture. Although, to make it more tempting and exciting,
the German corporate tax code only made bribery technically illegal in the late 1990s which
really affected many organizational cultures in terms of change to unethical behavior Another
significant aspect is that when coping with pressure from the competitive market, other loyal
workers, and higher leadership, employees should be active in some way. As a result, I conclude
that corruption was enriched in this case by a powerful corporate culture and workers were able
to cope with it.
The primary individual variable that facilitated bribery at Siemens:
1- Psychological variables are associated with how people think from the viewpoint of an ethical
decision.
2- Personal beliefs can be considered to be a person's moral ideals or agreed norms. So, in this
case, the beliefs of all people will dictate how every specific circumstance will be viewed. In this
situation we can determine the personal values, by going through the decisions Siemens have
made, and what was the important factor that leads to this situation.
3- Personal honesty that expresses personal value and implies that, regardless of the
implications, we should always do what is right and suggesting such trustworthiness was
not expressed in the corporate culture and actions of Siemens.
Q2. Explore the corruption scandals in terms of the issue-related factors discussed in
chapter 4, namely moral intensity and moral framing. To what extent did the firms
featured experience corruption as a morally intense issue and what impact did the moral
framing of the activities involved have on this?

Certain features of problems can check their moral severity. In general, it is possible that
problems with a lot of serious implications would achieve a greater degree of severity. Also,
issues that are considered by a societal consensus is to be more ethical or unethical are more
likely to engage with ethical decision making processes. On the other hand, the components of
moral intensity and the effect they might have on the ethical decision-making process are
influenced by the type of situation .
In this situation, the moral intensity can be viewed from various viewpoints as to how the
dilemma is framed. Since the vocabulary used or the frame in which we place our moral
concerns is the most critical feature of moral framing. And, based on moral framing, Siemens
framed bribery as a strategy to open new markets and a way to do the job.

Q3. Critically evaluate the initiatives Siemens has implemented to address bribery
problems across its operation. Are these sufficient or would you suggest further action?

Corruption is a societal problem that businesses should not avoid, it is the key issue that affects
the business and society directly. Corruption is becoming an important topic to be tackled by
corporations. Basically, it would contribute to the diverting of money to an un-honest
government from major services such as education and health care.
By adopting an anti-corruption strategy, Siemens is trying its best to prevent corruption,
especially after going through all the scandals listed. They employed an American law firm and
spent millions on internal audits, and also introduced new steps to strengthen the organization's
transparency and accountability. A former German finance minister has also been named as an
in-house monitor to help ensure that the business remains free of corruption.
I assume their acts are not satisfactory, although I say they are:
1- Must follow a comprehensive strategy for corporate social responsibility and make it part of
their CSR mission.
2- To be more proactive, especially when solving company-related problems.
3- In the anti-corruption campaign, take a greater leadership position by promoting enforcement
and collective acts.
4- Shifting the longstanding culture of the business that upholds bribery as a way of operating.

Q4. Thinking of bribery from the perspective of wider society, do you think that a fine
however high is an adequate response? What penalties, for instance, could you suggest to
foster more ethical values at the company or higher personal integrity on the part of its
employees?

Talking about the bribery side effect on the society and economy will create a less favorable
business environment and will weaken trust in public institutions and challenges democratic
principles. I guess that paying a fine will be accepted to some extent if we consider it as a kind of
compensation for the misuse of resources. But on the moral side of this punishment, it may be
inadequate because of its failure in changing the organizational culture and behavior and re-
orienting the management and employees back to the proper track Often, paying a fine won't
modify the organization's negative view of society. For that reason, I believe that the best way to
create a non-corrupted society is to reformulate plans and policies on a national, moral and
ethical basis.
Finally, In terms of the best punishment for such cases, I believe that prison sentence will be the
strongest deterrent punishment after paying back the misused money

You might also like