Sustainable Management Futures Assignment

Assignment instructions
Choose 2 of the 4 scenario/task combinations to answer
Answer with 1500 words for each (3000 in total)
Each or your two chosen scenario/task combinations are worth 50% of the total mark
This must be completed and submitted by 11pm on Friday 9th May 2014


Key word - Evaluate: This is designed to test your reasoning of cause and effect. You
need to offer structured and coherent explanations
The following marking indicates how each scenario will be assessed:

Mark
Learning
Outcome
Introduction - A clear outline of the issue, and what is going to be
covered in the assignment.
15 LO 1-4
Theory and Application - Clear explanation of the theoretical or
conceptual ideas that are going to use to address the question set.
Outlining the academic debates associated with the theoretical or
conceptual framework and providing a clear rationale for adopting
the chosen ideas.
Students should demonstrate an awareness of the key points from
the relevant theory and their significance in establishing the
importance of the issue they have chosen.

60 LO 1-4
Conclusion - The conclusion should be concise and accurately
reflect the content of the assignment. A good conclusion will reflect
on the strength of the essays central argument.
15 LO 1-4
Presentation Evidence of good range and appropriate references
used.
10 LO 1-4
TOTAL MARKS 100%


Scenario 1
Some years ago, a large German chemical firm, BASF, decided to follow the lead of many
other European firms and build a factory in the United States. BASF needed land; lots of it
(1,800 acres), and an inexpensive labour pool, almost 5 million gallons of fresh water every
day, a surrounding area free of import taxes and a nearby railway and ocean port. The spot
the company finally picked seemed perfect, an area near the coast of South Carolina called
Beaufort. It purchased 1,800 acres of land.
South Carolina and Beaufort County were pleased with BASFs decision. The surrounding area,
from which the company would pick its workers, was an economically depressed area and the
per capita income stood well below the national average. Jobs of any kind were desperately
needed. Even the Governor of South Carolina and his staff were eager for BASF to build in
South Carolina and although BASF had not yet finalized its exact production plans the state
Pollution Central Authority saw no problems with meeting the State pollution laws. BASF itself
said that although it would dump chemical by-products into the local Collection River, it
planned not to lower the rivers quality.
But trouble started immediately. To see why, one needs to know that Beaufort County is the
home of the internationally famous resort area called Hilton Head. Hilton Head attracts
thousands of vacationers every year most of them with plenty of money and its developers
were worried that the scenic splendour of the area might be marred by the air and water
pollution. Especially concerned about water pollution, resort developers charged that the
proposed chemical plant would pollute the Collection River. They argued that BASF plants in
Germany had polluted the Rhine and, in Belgium, the pollution control was allocated only one
million dollars.
The citizens of Beaufort County, in contrast to the Hilton Head Developers, welcomed BASF.
They presented the company with a petition bearing over 7,000 signatures endorsing the new
plant. As one local business commented, I would say 80 percent of the people in Beaufort
County are in favour of BASF. Those who arent are rich.
The manager of BASFs US operations was clearly confronted by an economic and moral
dilemma. He knew that preventing massive pollution was virtually impossible and, in any case,
outrageously expensive, the eagerness of South Carolina officials for new industry suggested
that pollution standards might be relaxed for BASF. If it decided to go ahead and build, was
the company to push for the maximum pollution control it could get away with under the law?
Such a policy might maximize corporate profits and the financial interests of the shareholders,
while at the same time it would lower the aesthetic quality of the environment. It might
make jobs available to Beaufort County while ignoring the resort industry and the enjoyment
of vacationers. Moreover, the long-term effects of dumping chemicals were hard to predict,
but past experiences did not give the manager a feeling of optimism. Pollution seemed to be
not only a business issue, but a moral one.
Task
Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of deontology and discourse ethics (Fisher,
Lovell, and Valero-Silva, Chapter 3). Use these approaches to evaluate how they could be
used by the manager in making a decision as to whether BASF should go ahead with
building the factory at Beaufort Country Park.
(1500 words)

Scenario 2
You work for a large finance organisation that operates in the global markets. In order to
survive they have decided to increase business by extending their services to those who are
not in a position to pay back loans, sub-prime clients also known as bad risks. Nevertheless,
they are being offered loans because your organisation has seen an opportunity to charge
higher interest rates for loans taken out by these clients (because they are seen as bad risks -
7.5% APR as opposed to 1.5% that is normally charged by your organisation). These clients are
afraid of going to loan sharks who will charge 50% APR.
You have been asked to be a financial advisor to those seeking high interest loans; they
contact your organisation to set up a loan they do this via a call centre and the loans can be
set up with a no questions asked 5 minute interview.
Your organisation has told you it is strict company policy not to tell clients taking out these
loans that if they default it will be sold onto a debt collection company who will pursue them
for any outstanding amounts at 25% APR.
Your organisation has also told you not to offer extended re-payment periods and if clients
ask about this you should tell them we will cross this bridge when we come to it repaying
X amount per month should be no problem even on your limited and fixed income lots of
people do it.
If a client asks why they are being charged a higher interest rate you are to reply that your
organisation says they are justified in charging 7.5% APR because they see it as doing a social
good by lending to those who need money but cannot get it at cheaper interest rates, and
also keeping them from the clutches of loan sharks you are in fact here to help doing them
a favour.
A client contacts you who has taken out such a loan and is now finding it difficult to make re-
payments. They tell you they may go to a loan shark because of the difficulties they now find
themselves in.
You have to follow company procedure when dealing with clients by not allowing them to
default on loans or make arrangements to make repayments over a longer period of time in
order to spread their outstanding debt, because if you do not you will be sacked. You must
not tell them about the debt collection company either if they want to default.
Task
Using TWO of the ethical categories in Fisher, Lovell, and Valero-Silva (2013:196-201)
apply and evaluate to what extent these are appropriate for dealing with the issues
described in Scenario 2.
(1500 words)





Scenario 3
Read the below extract by Erika Watson taken from the The Guardian (18 March 2012)
Quotas aren't the best way to get more women into boardrooms
A gender-equality policy that focuses on women at the top is unsustainable when most
women's prospects are shrinking. The European justice commissioner is proposing mandatory
quotas for women in boardrooms if voluntary measures fail. Few people disagree these days
with the need for more women at the top of business and banking. Three-quarters of people
across Europe say they are in favour of laws to ensure gender balanced boards. And perhaps
buoyed by those findings, the European justice commissioner, Viviane Redding, is proposing
mandatory quotas if a voluntary approach doesn't speed up. In the UK this is set against a
context of women losing jobs at a higher rate than men, and over 2 million low- to middle-
income families facing tax credit cuts in this week's budget. Strange times indeed: when
affirmative action is on the cards for those at the top, while equality is reined back for
everyone else.
Nevertheless, there are very good reasons for introducing boardroom gender quotas. There
are stacks of research that confirm that gender diversity on boards results in better corporate
performance on every measure, including finance. And there's widespread agreement too that
male-dominated cultures in the top echelons of banking and business created ghettos of
groupthink and excessive risk taking. Those narrow cultures were at the heart of what went
wrong in the global financial crisis. The Swedish prime minister recently said: "A male
atmosphere creates more risk and a greater risk of corruption."
Quotas have gradually increased female representation on boards in Norway from 9% in 2003
to over 40% today. And similar approaches are now being rolled out in other European
countries, including Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. The issue is being
seriously debated in Germany. Legislation varies, but there's a broadly common model of
gradually increasing targets, from 20% up to 40%. Corporate Britain, fairly united against
quotas, has heaved a sigh of relief this week. Voluntary efforts in the last year have resulted
in a new record high for female representation on the boards of the UK's 100 largest listed
companies. The proportion has gone up from 12.5% last year to 15.6% this year. Experts say
that at that level of momentum, we could reach 30% in four years. We'll see. If the increase is
not maintained, then, as David Cameron said recently, the case for quotas may be
unavoidable.
But while corporate Britain has pulled out the stops to get female non-executive directors on
to its boards, the proportion of women executive directors (female employees who sit on the
board) has crawled along from just 5.5% to 6.6%. Promotion prospects come at just the time
women start to have families. With expensive childcare, and few meaningful family-friendly
workplaces, few of those talented women last long enough to make it to the top. If quotas
are to work in the UK, we may need to borrow Norway's childcare system as well. As it is,
childcare tax credits are being cut for around 500,000 families in a few weeks. And quotas
won't work if they reflect and reinforce the growing chasm between top and bottom earners
in the UK today. The pay gap between the highest and lowest earners has reached an all-time
high. In the last year the pay of the lowest earners stood still or dropped, while the pay
of directors and chief executives increased by 15%. It may be impossible to justify a gender-
equality policy that focuses on women at the top at the same time as the position and
prospects of most working women are shrinking. If we're to change the culture on corporate
boards, quotas may be the worst option we have, except for all the others. But even then,
they need to go hand-in-hand with policies that support equal opportunities at work, at all
levels.
Task
Using the findings and recommendations of the Lord Davies Report argue the case for
affirmative action to introduce more women into the boardroom. Propose an action plan
for business to follow in order to encourage women to break through the glass ceiling.
(1500 words)


Scenario 4
Read the following extract from Business Ethics and Values by Fisher, Lovell, and Valero-Silva
(2013:414):
Societies and countries may differ in their business ethics and values. Any differences may be
internal to societies or countries or between them. Different countries may have, in high
ethics established within their religion, philosophical traditions an literature, different ideals
about the conduct of business and organisational life. Cultural tradition in one place might
see business growth and profitability as an end in itself; in other place economic ends might
be seen as subordinate to other goals. Within a country or society there may be competing
sets of values concerning business and management. Within Muslim countries, for example,
there may be differences between modernizers, who want to work to the values of global
business, and traditionalists, who may wish to apply Islamic values to business practices. Even
if countries and societies share the same values they may vary in the degree with which they
practise them. While two countries might, at a formal level, regard bribery as immoral, one
country might conduct its business in line with this standard but the second country might not.
There may be differences with a country and society between the values embodies in its high
traditions and those values adopted in everyday life.
Task
Using the business and managerial values in different countries and societies outlined in
Fisher, Lovell, and Valero-Silva (2013:417- 428) evaluate using appropriate examples,
how the ethics and values in different countries can be reconciled when doing business
with each other.
(1500 words)