6. This case is based on a real event. It is difficult to believe that the incident
was inspired by this reason
only. More probably, Azerbaijan employees of this company were not happy with the way their
company treated them. In addition, we are not familiar with a code or any other internal document of this
company. We also do not know, if the employee tried to apply to a respective department of the company,
authorized to copy all. We are unaware, if the employee did similar things in the past and what was the
company’s response. It is difficult to say without the full picture, if the employee was guilty technically.
However, we believe that the company should not have punished him so severely, moreover, that the
reprimand evoked a strong negative response of other staff members. However, it is obvious that foreign
companies operating in Baku shall commemorate memorable dates of their countries, as well as of
Azerbaijan. It is understood that a reasonable balance should be achieved. The January 20 deserves to be
commemorated, the same as July 4 for an American company, for instance. Companies may have tough
policy in this respect and forbid copying unauthorized dissemination of any non-business information. In
any case, such issues shall be foreseen in an internal document, for example, code of ethics and made
known to all staff members.
NOTES TO CASE STUDIES FOR CHAPTER II. INTERNAL CORPORATE ETHICAL
PROBLEMS
1. The very fact of employment of a close relative of the company’s president in itself provides a reason
for a conflict of interest. The department head can impose disciplinary punishment on all employees
reporting to him or her, regardless of their family connections. If need be, the president can be informed.
From ethical point of view, this situation can lead to the following consequences:
•
Disturb normal relations between all employees;
•
set a precedent for discrimination of employees;
•
form an unhealthy attitude, like “if the president’s relative can be late, why shall I come in time?”;
•
damage discipline.
2. Sexual harassment in the workplace is understood as unethical behavior of the opposite sex with a
sexual tinge: jokes of a sexual content, verbal and physical insults, forced sexual relations. Such behavior
is impermissible. Any manager who has received information on sexual harassment should organize a
serious investigation and subsequently take severe measures.
3.This situation does not have a concrete answer. The cafe owner is free to chose any of the candidates.
However, the following order of preference could be recommended: (c), (a), (b), (d), (e)
The (с)
candidate meets all requirements in terms of age and professional experience. Religious beliefs are not
much of a problem and a request to allocate space for prayers is not difficult to meet. Every employee
deserves respect, regardless of religion, race or ethnicity. The only weak point of candidate (b) is her
language problem. The fact that she quit her previous employment because she could not tolerate
unethical treatment, but still would not complain, speaks of her integrity. Candidate (a) has several
problems. She has a child that might demand much of her attention and she may ask for frequent sick
leaves, which contradicts your requirements. On the other hand, a single woman with a child to support
would work diligently to keep her job. Candidates (d) and (e) are less attractive in comparison to others,
as provocative appearances and family connections might create problems. In addition, candidate (e) is
overqualified and might have a problem with his reduced status.
4. This unofficial questionnaire ordered by the company head to a human resources manager is
impermissible from an ethical point of view. Heads of companies are not authorized to collect unofficial
information on their employees. At the same time, all employees have a right to privacy.
5. This case is typical for Azerbaijan realities. Practically all pharmaceutical companies have such kind of
arrangements. However,
from an ethical point of view, direct relations between sales agents and doctors
who write prescriptions, as well as honoraria in proportion to medications prescribed is wrong. At the
same time, representatives of companies are entitled to distribute promotional materials: brochures,
information lists, as well as pens, note pads, note books promoting company’s goods and services. Still,
prescription of medications of one firm means violation of rights of consumers, because patients trust
their doctors and abuse of their trust cannot be justified. As for doctors, they place themselves at a risk to
lose their credibility in the eyes of patients.
6. We have a clear conflict of interest here. You are torn between your loyalty to your friend and your
company. The company was not fair in assigning you to do this task alone. You have to submit a list of
candidates and delegate the decision making right to somebody else. It is even better to call a
commission, comprised by three people and you can be one of them. You should inform other members
of the commission of your relationships. It is quite possible that they would vote for your friend. If he is
otherwise competitive with other candidates, the company may give preference to him just because he is
your friend, as the company will be able to have an idea of what kind of person he is and evade the
problem of psychological incompatibility within the work team. On the other hand, it would be unfair
towards your friend simply to delete his name from the list only because of his connections and because
you do not wish risk your position within the company. In any case, you should not be the ultimate
decision maker.
Option (d) is not to be acceptable, as you are not authorized to use property of your employer to work for
another employer, even after work hours. Working from home – option (b),
does not involve abuse of
office time and property of your main employee. However, this option is not acceptable either, as a
competing firm is involved. Of course, if a shop security guard works as a school guard after work hours,
no conflict of interest emerges. In your case, you should notify your boss, who, quite probably, might
allow you to work temporarily for the second firm, if your company is on good terms with their
competitor and provided that your work does not give you access to company’s commercial secrets.
However, majority of firms would not allow their employees to work for another employer in the same
industry, moreover, for a competing firm, except for teaching and research.
NOTES TO CASE STUDIES FOR CHAPTER III. CUSTOMER RELATIONS
1. The Kodak shop owner faces a very difficult choice: either take the order and find ways to meet all
requirements of a customer or recommend a competitor and lose this customer. Choosing option (b), the
owner could win a customer with his sincerity and persuade the customer that a novice cameraman could
have coped with the task well. The owner can also consider calling some other firm and inquire if they
have a time slot. Option (a) would lead to breaking trust of the customer. In addition, one might question
what kind of service a business provides if it takes orders that it lacks the capacity to fill.
2. Unfortunately, this case is typical for Azerbaijan and some other countries. No doubt the competitor –
client of the same bank received this information from a bank officer, who violated one of the vital rights
of customers – the right for confidentiality of information. Violation of this principle, especially in the
banking sector, is impermissible and can not be justified by any ethical reasons. Such unethical act can
undermine reputation of the bank, damage its image and result in loss of customers.
3. The request of the vice president of the firm is unfair from ethical point of view, as she wishes to
receive confidential information without providing sufficient credentials. On the other hand, it is quite
possible that vice-president is trying to test if your firm is trustworthy. In any case, under these
circumstances an employee shall follow confidentiality rules and abstain from providing the requested
information. A reference to the confidentiality article of company’s business ethics code shall serve as a
justification for refusal.
4. From your point of view, optimal options are listed in descending order: (d), (b), (a), (c). We
recommend to try the most optimal option and then move further down the list, if need be. Option (d) is
the most optimal for you. But will the second customer accept it? Option (b) will help you to keep both
customers, provided that you can cope with the task. Options (а) or (с), will, most probably, cost you a
customer. If you have to chose between the two clients and there are no other factors involved, you
should give up the first client, because customers also have obligations before businesses. Your first
client violates customer’s obligation to follow arrangements.