Reference no: EM133507015

Case Study: Go Out of Business or Risk Surviving? A Case Study on Challenges of Decision Making within an International Context

This case is designed to encourage students to apply analytical concepts and tools to analyze and solve a real-world scenario. Examples of these concepts and frameworks include principles of responsible leadership, business ethics, morality and personal values, corporate values, consequentialism, deontology, utilitarianism, and ethical decision making paradigms.

IMPORTANT: This case consists of nine (9) questions. Please carefully read each question and be sure to respond to all sections.

Case Questions

Question 1. What ethical issues are present in the case? Please discuss.

Question 2. Conduct a stakeholder analysis to obtain an accurate understanding of each primary stakeholder involved in the case (emphasis on individual interests and influence). Prior to responding to this question, please conduct some research to find and review sample stakeholder analyses.

Question 3. Looking at the case, we realize that the involved stakeholders (e.g., Steve, Ali, the company's executives, etc.) come from different cultural backgrounds. Explain how cultural factors inform and influence your analysis of the case.

Question 4. Place yourself in the position of Steve and assess the morality of the act of imposing sanctions on a nation. How could your judgment influence Steve's decision?

Question 5. (a) What role do Steve's personal values and emotions play in determining the nature of his decision? Is this considered a common challenge in international business? Explain. (b) Analyze Ali's emotional state based on the information presented in the case. How could his emotional state influence his behavior and considerations for moral conduct?

Question 6. Analyze and assess some consequences of Steve's decision options (i.e., using consequentialism to assess a decision). Initially, list 3-4 potential courses of action that Steve can take. Then, shed light on each alternative's consequences and implications.

Question 7. Analyze and assess the rightness or wrongness of Steve's potential courses of action (i.e., 3-4 decision options) that you identified in question 6 (i.e., using deontology to assess a decision).

Question 8. Informed by the analysis and assessment that you conducted for questions 6 and 7, what alternative (final decision) would you choose out of the 3-4 options that you proposed, if you were Steve? Justify your response.

Question 9. Based on your knowledge of consequentialism and deontology, and how you applied these perspectives to analyze the case, as an organizational leader, would you utilize these frameworks individually to assess and inform your decision making, or do you think by integrating them you might be able to generate a more useful and effective framework for your decision making? Please analyze.