Rolls-Royce Theory Case Study

| Jonathan Archer and Zefrem Cochrane are employees of the Rugged Trucks Company, a light truck division of Gigantic Motors Corporation.

The second ethical problem in this case relates to the Rigas family’s use of publicly-held corporate funds as a personal “piggy bank.” The Rigases used the company jet for personal reasons “without approval of the Board of Directors”, on one occasion flying to Africa for a safari (Markon & Frank, 2002). On another, one of John Rigas’ sons used a corporate jet to pick up an actress friend of his (Grant, Young, & Nuzum, 2004). The former CFO claimed that Adelphia’s funds were used by one of Rigas’ sons to buy a condominium, and to build a $13M golf course (Grant, Young, & Nuzum,

In today’s 21st century, it takes good ethics for every company to strive competitively to maintain as the best top competitor in their industries; and has its provocations of smart goal as to how successfully they anticipate their business to function, when it comes to finances, attracting and recruiting employees, begin an admirable corporation to citizens, and while showing customers and employees love, courteous, and appreciation. Companies forestall unethical behavior of bad reputation to uphold the organization values. These atrocious speculations can permanently cause decreased revenues and will degrade the company name, sometimes irreparably damaged.

Traditionally, the positive image of a company or a brand is very important in the contemporary world. As a result, the question of morality of each individual working within an organization is of a paramount importance. In such a situation there should be no exceptions from the rule and executives could not be in a privileged position. This is the desirable ideal many companies strive to achieve at least in a public eye. However, the reality turns to be quite different from what is expected and the analyzed case of an executive’s double standard is just another evidence of the fact that the real life is so complicated that the common rules, including moral

It is clear from the case study that Alistair knows the contract is unorthodox. The problem he faces is whether he should overlook the bribe or report it to the board. The board of directors expects Alistair to tell the truth and report the bribe because of: his position as Chief Legal Officer, the board has a very strong ethics policy and they are wary of unethical activities.

In the past few years, enterprise integrity has come up on a regular subject of conversation. In the past ten years only, we have seen numerous situations associated with collaborative scams which have shaken the people 's trust in businesses and also the general economic climate. A few of the many salient frauds are the WorldCom and Enron 's scams, the ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff 's, the latest accusations of Goldman Sachs tricking option traders to guarantee the company 's personal profit. Incidents such as these designed us all, as upcoming corporation professionals as well as market leaders, think about ethics and its particular function in the commercial world (Gross, 2010.)

Many companies have ethical decisions that need to be and sometimes those decisions can affect many individuals or just a few. Making ethical decisions may be placed solely on one person’s shoulders or it may be a decision that multiple individuals must be involved in. There are several ethical issues in the Richardson Drilling case that should be considered. For instance, bribery, purchasing substandard parts with lack of disclosure that causes injuries, and revealing sensitive information. One potential ethical concern that could arise has to do with ongoing health insurance and the employer’s responsibility.

The deontological ethics states that there are things that we must do as a matter of principle regardless of consequences (Moral standards, PowerPoint Slides). Here the Vice President, Rodford had to act on the best interest of the company in making profit and surviving the competition against European and Japanese cars. Therefore he ignored the fact of putting people in risk of accidents. The positive right test assists the wellbeing of the company and its employee by making sales and profit. Whereas the negative right test overrides the wellbeing of the customers and the community members with the risk of death. Again since life is irreplaceable and profit can substituted by other means, the action of the company is wrong from the deontological view too.

Business ethics since the beginning of this decade has been slowly eroding; if we are to believe what we see and hear in the media. Several times a day, one can view some derogatory piece of information concerning a business. However, it must also be considered that these companies are contributing to that stigma. There have been a variety of companies and individuals who have figured prominently in the media concerning their unethical behavior.

In this paper I will analyze the case study of Mattel Inc. and their Global Manufacturing Principles (GMP) and applying it to three different virtue ethics; fairness, honesty and justice. Then I will apply deontology, “always act in such a way that you can also will that the maxim of your action should become a universal law.

The world we live in is surrounded by diesel engines. They are on the freeways, railways, airways, and are one of the leading electricity producers in the world. They are also becoming more popular in automobiles. These engines are efficient and reliable and they are getting very sophisticated. However, the physics behind these engines has not changed.

This paper argues that the best way for business to operate is based on deontology because motives comes first than the action and motives determines the quality of action and thus the quality of results.

We've all seen them before, the mysterious chunks of metal under the hoods of our cars. They start when we turn the key and take us where we want to go. But how does an engine work? Internal combustion engines are a very important part of everyday life. We use them in our cars, trucks, airplanes. boats, snowmachines, 4 wheelers, and heavy machinery. These pages will help familiarize you with the basic concepts of how an engine works, an understanding of engine output, and some information on how forced induction or "boost" increases power output.

Rolls-Royce Limited is a renowned British car manufacturing company and later, aero-engine manufacturing company founded by Charles Stewart Rolls and Sir Frederick Henry Royce on 15 March 1906 as the result of a partnership formed in 1904. In 1906 they launched the six-cylinder Silver Ghost that, within a year, was hailed as the best car in the world. Once again like the other companies I have covered Rolls Royce also created an outstanding product, which launched them on to the engineering scene, this was again a vital stage of the companies success. It would have brought them income that could then be reinvested in future developments, which allowed the company to grow and develop. At the start of the First World War the demand from the nation for military planes was increasing, this encouraged Royce to design his first aero engine, it was called the Eagle and it provided for almost half of the total engines in the skies at this point in time. The eagle also was the power behind the first direct transatlantic flight as well as the first flight from England to Australia. The late 1920s saw Rolls Royce develop the 'R' engine to power Britain's entry in the International Schneider Trophy seaplane contest. It established a new world air speed record of over 400mph in 1931. More importantly, these records gave Royce the funds and technological base to develop the Merlin, which he had begun to work on before his death in 1933. The Merlin powered two of the most influential

In the first ethical problem selected, two separate books were kept by personnel in the Adelphia financial management department with the intent of deceiving external auditors; thus leading shareholders and the public to believe that the company was ultimately worth more than it was in actuality. In the second, the Rigas family frivolously dwindled away public money for personal selfish consumption which is clearly a violation of the public’s trust. In the weeks following the unraveling of events and divulgence of information, a number of townspeople and investors were concerned that the family was rather free with shareholder money and further believed corporate money was used to finance public generosity as previously discussed in this paper (Barlaup, Hanne, & Stuart, 2009, p. 10).