Laudable, culpable and non-culpable decisions Essay

Laudable, culpable and non-culpable decisions - Essay Example This research aims to evaluate and present laudable, culpable and non-culpable decisions. Laudable decision: BAES made an initiative to hire Lood Woolf to have an independent and irreproachable investigation into its ethical practices as a business and to identify areas of improvement where its dealings as a business entity can be improved. Despite of all the unscrupulous dealings of BAES, its decision to have an independent panel of investigators to be headed by Lord Woolf that would inquire into BAES ethical standards was laudable. This initiative yielded positive results in identifying which ethical practices needs improvement and produced a recommendation on how to improve it. Lord Woolf himself practiced ethical propriety in setting the parameters of his investigation. Agreeing to investigate cases which are also conducted by SFO would be tantamount into meddling in the investigation by the authorities and thus, would be ethically inappropriate. Non-culpable decision: In January , 1997, the chief executive officer (CEO) of British Aerospace (BAe), backed Tony Blair to become Prime Minister of the UK. Many business leaders did the same. Although it is not illegal for a business entity to support a politician vying for office, it is deemed inappropriate to back somebody with the expectation of business gains in the future. Though it was not tacitly expressed in the case that BAES solicited for business favours when Tony Blair became the Prime Minister of UK, it was implied that he was returning favours to BAES when acted like a salesman for BAES in trying to persuade the Czech Republic Gripen fighter jets, worth $1bn. No immediately harm was done with BAES’s political support to the candidacy of Tony Blair, but the political gratuity extended by Tony Blair leading to BAES unethical and controversial business practices tainted UK’s defence industry. Culpable decisions Blameworthy Context In 2001, Tanzania paid to BAES $21 million for a military a ir traffic control (ATC) system that came from debt that was supposed to be spent on Tanzanian education. This decision of Tanzanian President Benjamin Mpaka to purchase an overpriced (at least four times more expensive than civilian radar) air traffic control (ATC) system which was disbursed from a fund that was supposed to be spent on Tanzanian education was most blameworthy. BAES used Shailesh Vithlani, a â€Å"marketing adviser† to secure a a ?28m Air Traffic Control radar which was four times more expensive than a civilian radar). Payments to Vithlani were routed through Red Diamong Trading (RDT), a shell company based offshore in the British Virgin Islands (BVI). It would be naive not to have the â€Å"obvious inference† that some of the money Vithlani got was used to bribe Tanzanian officials. 2. Outlining standard ways to place blame and respond to it, interpret any defensive utterances by the culprits (and their supporters); and interpret their critics’ (and victims’) utterances Outcome related disappointments/blame-ORD Person/relationship-related disappointment – PRD ORD + PRD (any utterances expressing both) Utterance: Mr Turner said: â€Å"we are fully complying with all the SFO’s requests. We are acting in a responsible and dignified way and we are very proud of this company. We think it is unfair and unjust that our reputation is being affected.† Interpretation: BAES is bluffing that they are an ethical company and is offended with the decision of SFO to investigate their company. Utterance: Mike Turner said: â€Å"we want to be in a position to provide customers, investors, employees and communities [with] further assurance that our policies, ethics and business conduct are subject to continuous improvement and set the pace for the international defence industry.† Interpretation: It is just a PR utterance that BAES does not really mean to say considering their actual