Reference no: EM132284500
Part 1: Please address each item below for each movie and articles
The total length of your critical viewing form responses should be approximately one-half to one page, single spaced.
A.
a. Briefly summarize the basic plot, or issue that the movie addresses.
b. What do you think is the most interesting point in the movie?
c. What is the most controversial statement you've heard?
d. What is the most important ethical issue that the movie is addressing? Please explain.
e. Inside the Meltdown (Inside Job Movie) - could another meltdown happen? If so how might it be best prevented?(100-150 words for this question)
B.
a. Briefly summarize the basic plot, or issue that the movie addresses.
b. What do you think is the most interesting point in the movie?
c. What is the most controversial statement you've heard?
d. What is the most important ethical issue that the movie is addressing? Please explain.
e. Reactions to Gasland/The Sky is Pink.(100-150 words for this question)
C.
a. Briefly summarize the basic plot, or issue that the movie addresses.
b. What do you think is the most interesting point in the movie?
c. What is the most controversial statement you've heard?
d. What is the most important ethical issue that the movie is addressing? Please explain.
e. Reactions to Fed Up (e.g., does this make you want to change your diet?)(100-150 words for this question)
D.
a. Briefly summarize the basic plot, or issue that the movie addresses.
b. What do you think is the most interesting point in the movie?
c. What is the most controversial statement you've heard?
d. What is the most important ethical issue that the movie is addressing? Please explain.
E.
a. Are corporations a major cause of materialism & overconsumption? (DeAngelis Article and High Price of Materialism video)(100-150 words for this question)
Part 2: Written Case: Getting Medicine to Bosnia: Acceptable Bribery?
As chief legal officer in a well-respected company making lifesaving drugs, Gordon Smith was asked by his board of directors to look into rumors of bribery with the firm's Bosnia contract.
The contract, he discovered, had been ordinary in almost every respect: A major relief organization had contracted with his company to supply a million inexpensive kits of medicine for delivery into the war-torn regions of Bosnia. Like most such contracts with charitable organizations, it contained hardly any profit for his firm.
What he found strange, however, was the payment of an extraordinarily large commission to a Romanian distributor to deliver the kits deep into Bosnia. Seeking out the executive in his own firm who had negotiated the contract, he had one question in mind: Was this a bribe?
Yes said the executive, it's a bribe that we're paying. According to the Romanian distributor, the backs of the delivery trucks were loaded with the kits - and the glove compartments were stuffed with cash.
That way, when the drivers were stopped at roadblocks set up by local militia units operating all across Bosnia, they could pay whatever was demanded and continue their journey. In the past, he noted, drivers without cash had been taken from their trucks and shot. If the kits were to be delivered, this was a cost of doing business.
Gordon felt sure that none of the money had flowed back to the executive, whose only motive was to get the kits delivered. Gordon faced a dilemma. Should he draft a report to the board on this most unorthodox contract? Or should he keep silent?
Analysis
Everything in Gordon's background with his company told him that this contract was not the way to do business. Bribery, he knew, was simply unacceptable to the board, who felt strongly that once that barrier was breached, there would be no stopping the shakedowns in the future.
But everything in his makeup as a compassionate being told him that providing medicine for the wounded was of overriding importance, and that the normal ethic of commerce didn't apply in a war zone.
Please answer the questions below. The length of your written case assignment form responses should be approximately one to one and a half pages, single spaced. This form will be graded on a pass/fail basis. To pass, you need to provide reasonably detailed and insightful answers to the questions below.
1. First, what defines a bribe? Is a restaurant tip a bribe? How about a corporate invitation to a luxury box at say a Phillies baseball game? What criteria can you list that distinguishes a bribe?
2. Who are the stakeholders to Gordon's decision as to whether to continue the bribe payments or not? Please list them with a brief explanation.
3. As the case says, "What should Gordon do?" Do you continue with the bribe payments (these clearly are bribes)? If so, why; if not, why not? Please indicate which ethical perspective(s) (i.e., profit maximization, utilitarianism, universalism) support your decision.
4. Have you ever been asked to pay a bribe? If so, what did you do?(100-150 words for this question)
Part 3: Reflection Paper Instructions
Nike Quietly Goes Green
The brand's eco-friendly products are cheaper to make, but its buyers are more interested in design and performance than sustainability
By Reena Jana
The sole of Nike's (NKE) new Air Jordan is made with ground-up bits of old Nike sneakers. But the company isn't selling it as an eco-friendly shoe: That might not be good for business.
Nike, which is No. 42 on BusinessWeek 's list of the top-performing companies, has an unusual problem. Like many companies, it is trying to make its supply chain and products greener, which brings obvious environmental benefits and, just as important these days, financial ones, too.
But while executives at General Electric (GE) and Wal-Mart (WMT) eagerly advertise the eco- conscious changes they're making, those at Nike choose to play down sustainability initiatives. Nike customers buy shoes to make them feel fast, slick, and hip; they don't care much about being eco-chic. "Nike has always been about winning," says Dean Crutchfield, an independent branding consultant in New York. "How is sustainability relevant to its brand?"
Nike came to this same conclusion after a less-than-successful experiment a few years ago. The company launched its first line of environmentally friendly shoes, called "Considered," in 2005. It had high hopes for a walking boot, made with brown hemp fibers, that looked obviously earthy. Critics called the $110 shoes "Air Hobbits" because of their forest-dweller feel and took Nike to task for a design that detracted from its high-tech image. The boots didn't sell well, and within a year were taken off the shelves.
The lesson for Nike was that its green innovations should continue, but its customers shouldn't be able to tell. "We want to do more and say less," is the way Lorrie Vogel, who oversees Nike's green business practices, puts it. The company also has to be careful about promoting itself as socially responsible because of its past use of sweatshop labor in Asian factories.
The sustainability push comes at a time when Chief Executive Mark G. Parker is also trying to streamline operations. The financial imperative to do so has never been clearer: Nike's revenues fell by 2%, to $4.4 billion, during its most recent quarter, which ended Feb. 28. In May it laid off 5% of its worldwide staff. The company doesn't give estimates of how much it might save bymaking its manufacturing more green, but it expects to reduce the amount of material it wastes by 17% over the next decade.
PERFORMING WELL
Nike's marketing, though, doesn't suggest a feel-good, do-good attitude; and its designs don't compromise quality. "Saving money [with an environmentally friendly product] only works if people buy it," says Sam Poser, an analyst with brokerage firm Sterne Agee. "It has to be fabulous, not just green."
Last year, Nike debuted the Air Jordan XX3, which was designed so that all the pieces of the shoe fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. That eliminates any excess plastic. The company also invented a sewing machine that speeds up assembly time, which saves electricity. Nike simply heralded the XX3 as the next iteration in a 24-year string of Air Jordans. In January it rolled out the 2009 version, which also makes use of eco-friendly manufacturing.
And what do you know? The Air Jordans continue to sell well, recycled materials and all, suggesting that customers are still happy with the shoe's performance. Charles D. Denson, Nike brand chief, says that during the company's most recent quarter Air Jordan helped the basketball shoe division achieve double-digit growth. Nike's lineup now includes eco-friendly basketball, football, soccer, tennis, and running shoes.
Question:
Has the "Go Green," environmental sustainability movement changed your daily life (e.g., shopping habits, how you commute or dispose of waste etc.)?
- If so, in what way? And why do you do these things? Would any of the ethical theories discussed in the course (profit maximization, utilitarianism, universalism) explain your actions?
- If not, why not? Would any of the ethical theories (profit maximization, utilitarianism, universalism) explain your actions (or lack of action)?
This part should be one to two double spaced pages, using 1 inch margins and a normal sized font. Your reflection paper will be graded on a pass/fail basis. To pass, you need to do a reasonable job of explaining your answer and meet the page requirement.