ehitcs final paper

8/3/2019 Ehitcs Final Paper

1/11

To bribe or not to bribe, thatis the question.

Ethics and Governance for the Global Enterprise-Final Paper

Presented to

Team 6

4405 B2


2/11

Case A

Rahul was frantically pacing in his office cubicle, contemplating his next move. He was

rapidly getting overwhelmed with the dilemma he was in. He could not figure out exactly what

his next move should be. In his mind, it was clear what he needed to do, but the left side of his

brain egged him on to act otherwise. Rahul never imagined himself to be in such a situation in a

software professionals job. He always thought that standards of ethics of people in this industry

were an aberration of the typical ethical standards one might assume to be in Indian work place

where most employees are indifferent towards corruption.

Rahul had always been a bright engineering student in college and in his final year, he

has secured an offer for a lucrative job in PSS IT Solutions, Bangalore as a software developer.

He had quickly escalated to the position of a module lead within two years time, a feat which

took others to achieve in five years time. He had five software engineers reporting to him, and

he, in turn, reported to his project manager Alok, along with two other module leads Aakash and

Samir. The economic recession in 2008 heavily deterred the business in the IT sector, and PSS

IT Solutions was no exception. Business was bleak and his team required projects to keep his

team funded. Otherwise the team was staring at the prospects of the layoff of the entire team.

Very ominously, a project opened up in the Bangalore which required a software solution for the

automation of billing for the water utilities department of the Bangalore Municipal Corporation.

All software companies were to file tenders (bids) for their proposal for the budget of the

software, and the lowest tender would get selected.

Rahul and his team mates were enthused with the prospect of taking on this project, as it

ensured the survival of his team. But a nagging undertone of anxiety and insecurity also crept in


3/11

their minds, as it was not a given that their team would be selected for the project. Sure, his team

had done its due diligence to ensure that the bid was reasonably priced and that they could not go

any lower, but that did not guarantee a lower bid from competitors. Over a meeting between the

module leads and the project manager, Samir proposed to the team to approach one of the

government clerks in the Bangalore municipality. He knew the clerk personally, and the clerk

had suggested that he would furnish Samir with the lowest bid the municipal department

received, in exchange for a bribe. This would enable their team to file for the lowest tender, thus

ensuring their teams selection for the project. Rahul internally laughed at the suggestion, and

anticipated strong words from Alok for Samir. But to his astonishment, Alok further inquired

about this option and asked Samir how much it would cost the team for the information of this

kind. Samir estimated the bribe to be in the amounts of approximately Rs 100,000.

Rahul was both bewildered and appalled at the same time with the idea of bribing their

way for the selection of this project. He could not fathom that the team was actually thinking of

going ahead with the plan. But he noticed that Aakash, the other module lead, was shifting

uneasily in his chair and he was giving a vibe of discomfort with the idea. Even so, he said

nothing and just went along with Alok and Samir. Rahul voiced his opinion against any such

action but he was immediately shut down by Alok, who said that he was not interested in Rahuls

holier than thou attitude, and that the times were dire, and it was not a time to be judgmental

and that they rather needed to be practical. With no intentions of aggravating his boss further,

Rahul kept quiet. Although he had been harshly quieted down by his boss, Rahul was still not

comfortable with the idea of bribing the clerk.

As he was pacing in his cubicle, he contemplated that he had three action plans he could

work on. One, go to Sriram, the group project manager, to whom Alok reported and fill him in to

the situation and in his estimate, Sriram would take the appropriate actions to neutralize the


4/11

situation. Another option was to go to the ethics board in the company, seek their advice and

leave the ethics board to take corrective actions against the issue. But both these action plans

were not a good idea, as Rahul estimated that if Sriram or the Ethics board thought otherwise, the

consequences for his career would be devastating. He would get fired and never get a

recommendation letter from the company to apply for jobs elsewhere, which lead to his third

option, of doing nothing about it. This seemed the safest option, but he knew that he would never

forgive himself if he went ahead with the plan.

Stakeholder Analysis

Rahuls mind is continuously thinking of all the consequences of his possible steps. He is

also trying to analyze why everyone is not opposing the idea even when they know this is illegal.

Rahul is the only champion against the idea of bribery. He is totally disenchanted with the way

his team is ready to put the companys values and its reputation at stake. If this news leaks to the

media, it will have very bad ramifications on the companys brand reputation. But above all

doing anything like this is totally against the set of personal and moral values he has grown up

with.

All these things are forcing him to raise voice against his project manager and take some

corrective measures. However, as soon as he decides to go against his project manager in his

mind, he starts envisioning the consequences. He thinks of his impeccable career so far, and he

does not want to jeopardize his fast growing career in the company by getting tagged as trouble

maker or a whistle blower. Rahul then thinks of his opponents Alok and the other module lead

Samir and tries to figure out what is on stake for them. The entire teams future depends on Alok.

At present the team is in desperate need of a new project.


5/11

Rahul also tries to figure out whom can he approach regarding this sensitive issue. Group

Manager Sriram is one person who always appreciates him for his good work and he also seems

to be very impressed by him. During an informal dinner once Sriram had told Rahul to never

hesitate to approach him if he ever had any problem. Rahul also remembers that in his training

days he had a presentation from Ethics Board, and he thought of the group to be quite effective

and pertinent. But he had never heard anything from the Ethics Board beyond that point in time.

It seemed as if the board was inconspicuous. Though he perceives them as an ally who can also

protect him personally, but he is skeptical and afraid of what if they see them as troublemaker

and align their position with Alok and rest of the team. He approached Srirams office a number

of times but could not muster up the courage to go and talk to him regarding this topic. This

probably is because of the Indian culture where people do not feel comfortable approaching their

bosses because they feel afraid that the boss will think that the candidate is trying to undermine

the teams position.

Rahul recalls all his years growing up and the numerous circumstances where he

witnessed cases of bribery, whether it was to traffic police after breaking a traffic rule or

government official to get your work done, all these things have been so prevalent in society that

it does not even look wrong to many people. Rahul had thought software industry as one of the

cleaner industries, and he never thought he will be in the middle of a bribery case.

Levers to use

Rahul faces a tough task of convincing Project Manager Alok and the other Module Lead

Sameer to not pursue with the plan of bribing the government employee. In order to reinforce his

point to them, he needs to think from their point of view, i.e. from a Result perspective. He also

needs to have strong arguments to counter Aloks logic and those arguments will work better if

he can show them through results as the consequences of this unethical action. For example, if


6/11

Alok talks about alternative ways to ensure getting the project, he has to either suggest some idea

which will give them result or the other way to intimidate them by the possibility of them getting

caught.

On the other hand, he needs to utilize his contact with the Group Manager well by putting

his point of view in front him. He should also make Sriram understand how it can affect his

reputation. But before approaching Sriram, Rahul should have all his research done on the results

of getting and not getting the contract and also results of harm the bribery case can cause if it

leaks.

Since this is definitely a violation of ethical code of conduct of the company, Rahul

should approach the Ethics board with his situation. He must talk to them how important it is for

the companys value and its brand reputation to not to indulge in any sort of unethical practices.

He should talk to the members of the Ethics Board one on one so that he can convince some of

them, if not all.

Reasons and RationalizationClearly evident from the case, Rahul is a character perspective person with strong

emphasis on values and ethics. He is a person committed to sincerity and strong moral and

personal values. It is evident from his actions and demeanor, his key character values like

honesty; wisdom and integrity emulate the core key values for a person with Character

perspective.

However, Alok, the project manager would be a person who is primarily of Results

perspective. He strongly believes in measurable results, getting the job done and protecting

group interests which he believes is to work on a funded project and avoid being fired by the

company for lack of work. His key values are goals and consequences. He is insecure of the


7/11

consequences of not finding a project for the team in a timely fashion which might be

detrimental, and thus wants to win the bid on this project at any cost.

Alok, being a results perspective person tries to rationalize his decision to go for

unethical practice of paying bribe to the government official by saying that it is a common

practice in the industry. But Rahul says that this is against the law and portrays his character

perspective by showing clear intent of using legal and ethical practices to win the bid. Aloks

other statements to rationalize his acts were that he is just utilizing the resources and even said

that it is the benefit that they get from knowing the government official and defends his action by

saying that the person is ready to help and we should capitalize on that.

However, Rahul defends his ideas by arguing that they should not take unfair

advantage of the resources and puts forward that this help by government official is not what

networking is meant to achieve. Networking is intended to grow your business in a right and

legal way.

After the exchange of reasons and rationalizations between two conflicting

personalities, the conversation got heated since neither of them were succumbing to the ideas of

the other and willing to concede. This triggered Alok to challenge Rahul by asking him to

furnish him with an alternative to secure this project and help avoiding the team to get dissolved

or fired. He tries to persuade Rahul by saying that the survival of the team is contingent on this

project and Rahul counters both the arguments by stating that hard, sincere work is the best bet to

get this project. By making the best and competitive bid, he believes they could ensure the

project allocation. For the survival of the team rationalization, he counters it by saying that

compromising teams values for the sake of getting project is not the right solution in this case

and says that the team would not like to compromise their personal values.

The reasons and rationalizations of both Rahul and Alok are shown in Exhibit 1.


8/11

Exhibit 1

Powerful and Persuasive Response

The most powerful and persuasive response would be to first look toward solving the

matter internally within the company so that it prevents the negative publicity for the

organization which could potentially dent the image of the company and impact its brand stature.

As suggested before, Rahul does have two stakeholders as potential allies in the form of the

ethics board and the group project manager and both of them could be approached with rationale,

logic and legal consequences of indulging in bribery. Other tactics may include looking for past

examples of puni shment f rom similar instances in the past that could have taken place within the


9/11

company or in the industry through researching or taking advice from trusted colleagues and

insiders in the company. Another suggestion could be doing a comparative study of other

companies that faced similar ethical dilemmas within the software industry where in their best

practices could be applied or improvised as a yardstick or a counter measure in dealing with the

current situation.

Since Rahul has a character mindset w hich makes him inherently passionate about his

cause, this would be an important quality that could be harnessed and his efforts can be

channelized to generate maximum impact and achieve the desired results. His motivation should

be the first tool that has to be capitalized upon to enforce such counter strategies to prevent

bribes. The ethics board is constituted in the company to protect and prevent such malicious

dealings and to safeguard and enforce the highest ethical standards highlighted by the core values

and mission statements of the company during its formation. The ethics board should be then

notified and further guidance should be sought in order to address the issue in this forum by

voicing our concern with sufficient case based material. Another measure could also be to

approach and present the case to the Group Project Manager using referent power i.e. through

a trusted colleague who has a friendly relationship with the Group Project Manager through a

one on one appointment highlighting the consequences of such an illegal act of bribery. We

can clearly make him understand the possible short term and the long term consequences of

encouraging unethical behavior within the company resulting in more corruption, dilution of

values, ethics, and eventually disrupt the moral fabric and operational pillars of the company

leading to a complete collapse of the very foundation on which it was built.

In case the first two steps as described above fail, the other alternatives could also include

approaching the media through an influential friend or through trusted network of relationships


10/11

and blow the lid on the act of corruption in the company and in the government. Though this

option might be deemed as a powerful and persuasive response it is difficult to envision Rahul

as a lynch pin that spearheads such campaigns.

Case B

After all the contemplation and the debates in his mind, Rahul eventually succumbed to

the pressure, and did not do anything about the blatant violation of ethical standards that was

exhibited in this case. His insecurity with the job situation, the fact that he was the only bread

earner in the family, further reinforced his stance. Samir got the lowest bid from the clerk and the

team was able to secure the project allocation. But this rendered Rahul guilt ridden for the next

few months and it was a detriment on his personal as well as professional life. He tried to

rationalize the situation by thinking that it was not such a bad thing, as no evident harm was

done, and who knows, they might have landed themselves with the project anyways with a

competitive bid. But however hard he tried, he could not shrug away the guilt and he eventually

submitted his resignation to Alok eight months after the incident and joined another company.

AppendixExhibit 2: Stakeholders


11/11

Exhibit 3: Stakeholder Mapping

Exhibit 4: How to tackle Opponents

ehitcs final paper

Documents