Posted: February 5th, 2019

Strayer BUS309 week 1 discussions

“Working Conditions at Foxconn®” Please respond to the following:Employees at Foxconn® factories described in the e-Activity worked more hours than allowed under Chinese labor laws. Yet the violation of these standards is widespread in manufacturing and the demanding treatment of workers is commonly accepted. Compare and contrast the ethos of Foxconn® with the basic tenets of ethical relativism. Assess the degree to which companies like Apple might be affected by such ethical relativism in the countries in which their suppliers operate..3;=”” color:=”” rgb(51,=”” 51,=”” 51);=”” letter-spacing:=”” orphans:=”” auto;=”” text-align:=”” start;=”” text-indent:=”” text-transform:=”” none;=”” white-space:=”” widows:=”” word-spacing:=”” -webkit-text-stroke-width:=”” background-color:=”” rgb(230,=”” 230,=”” 230);”=””>”The A7D Affair” Please respond to the following:Organizations often encourage their members to conform to certain norms and to accept policies and goals as their own. This can sometimes cause individuals to sacrifice their integrity and to fail to see themselves as morally responsible for their actions. Identify two instances in the case study in which employees at Goodrich succumbed to the pressures of conformity. Consider the level at which both groupthink and diffusion of responsibility affected the actions of those involved in the A7D affair, and illustrate how an employee at the company might have rationalized his or her decision to conform.”Yahoo CEO Bans Telecommuting” Please respond to the following:Imagine you are the CEO of Yahoo!, and outline the relevant obligations, ideals, and effects that you believe should be taken into consideration before developing a company policy regarding employees working remotely. Examine the ways in which the obligations, ideals, and effects that you have outlined might conflict with one another, and propose how you would resolve those conflicts. “Hacking Into Harvard” Please respond to the following:As applicants began to defend themselves against the penalties handed out by the business schools, they appealed to both consequentialist and nonconsequentialist criteria to support their actions. Some responded by pointing out that their intentions were never malicious, while others argued they did not think checking their application statuses would cause any real harm. Review the case study and analyze the actions of the students from a Kantian perspective. Consider whether the actions taken by the hackers were permissible according the standard of universal acceptability.