In: Economics
Case study:
A Few Good People: Several years ago a very successful CEO and principal stockholder in a chemical company came to speak to the students at William and Mary. Our speaker is an entrepreneur who was involved with the start-up of his company. He is financially very successful and at the time he spoke to W&M students he was a member of the advisory board of a business school in his home city. Our speaker revealed that he is quite comfortable making economic trade-offs between fines for chemical pollution of the environment and business profitability. If the expenses related to fines plus the costs of paying-off any officials are less than the gains to be had from low-cost, high-pollution production, he believes the decision is simply a matter of evaluating the cash flows. Our speaker has business operations in many parts of the world and he indicated that getting around pollution problems is often more complicated than simply paying fines. In many countries it is helpful or even necessary to bribe government officials. Bribes might be paid to high-ranking officials who can influence the legislative process or make decisions to approve plant operations and locations. Bribes might also be paid to local officials to overlook violations or to avoid enforcing existing laws. Of course, it goes without saying, the bribes only make business sense if the financial advantages gained are greater than the cost of the bribes. Our speaker complained that under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FPCA) the United States in addition to civil penalties can impose criminal penalties for certain "corrupt" practices possibly including some of the bribery practices described above. He noted that other countries regard these business practices as civil problems that may or may not result in fines. He argued that on a "level playing field" the United States should not subject him to exposure to jail-time when business people from other countries can pay for their premeditated transgressions with fines. Our speaker also identified new international business opportunities by naming countries more welcoming to chemical production because of their lax, unenforced, or non-existent environmental restrictions. He ended his remarks by welcoming inquiries from interested students. He was, as he said, always on the watch for a "few good people" to add to his staff. Our guest was controversial. Some students were upset that such a politically incorrect speaker could have slipped by the speakers' committee. They asked, “How could we expose students to such a pernicious influence?” Other students found themselves more interested in the speaker's formula for success. The speaker did surprise most people in the audience both with his candor and his business practices. As the event progressed the speaker became aware that he was not receiving the admiration and appreciation he expected. Towards the end of his time, he became far less comfortable discussing his leadership, and he has not returned.
Question:
1. From the passage, we can analyze some of the traits which the speaker might be looking while hiring
2.
There are a lot of reasons why several big business corporations support the FCPA.
Hope this helps. Do hit the thumbs up. Cheers!