Question

Case Study

Louise Simms, newly graduated with a master of business administration (MBA) degree, was hired by a prestigious multinational firm based in the United States. With minimal training, she was sent to join a company partner to negotiate with a high- ranking Middle Eastern government official. The partner informed Simms that he would introduce her to the government contact and then leave her to “get the job done.” Her assignment was to “do whatever it takes to win the contract: it’s worth millions to us.” The contract would enable Simms’ firm to select and manage technology companies that would install a multimillion-dollar computer system for that government. While in the country, Simms was told by the official that Simms’ firm had “an excellent chance of getting the contract” if the official’s nephew, who owned and operated a computer company in that country, could be assured “a good piece of the action.” On two different occasions, while discussing details, the official attempted unwelcome advances toward Simms. He backed off both times when he observed her subtle negative responses. Simms was told that “the deal” would remain a confidential matter and the official closed by saying, “That’s how we do business here; take it or leave it.” Simms was frustrated about the terms of the deal and about the advances toward her. She called her superior in Chicago and urged him not to accept these conditions because of the questionable arrangements and also because of the disrespect shown toward her, which she said reflected on the company as well. Simms’ supervisor responded, “Take the deal! And don’t let your emotions get involved. You’re in another culture. Go with the flow. Accept the offer and get the contract groundwork started. Use your best judgment on how to handle the details.” Simms couldn’t sleep that night. She now had doubts about her supervisor’s and the government administrator’s ethics. She felt that she had conflicting priorities. This was her first job and a significant opportunity. At the same time, she had to live with herself.

Question:

Apply the Ethical Relativism Approach to Simms's case.

Answer 1

According to Ethical Relativism, there are no absolute right or wrong, and the perceptions totally depend on the culture, society and norms of a particular place or time. In Simms’s case, it is understood that she in a different culture on a work assignment and the ethics of that particular place or society demands that she bend ways to accommodate their agendas which she clearly is not happy to go along with. There is a clear clash of cultural values and her own moral values as a person. To explain this scenario better, we can look at the two kinds of Ethical Relativism - Cultural relativism and Subjective ethical relativism. Cultural relativism speaks of what is right or wrong in a particular culture and it can totally differ from culture to culture, what may seem to be right in one culture may seem to be wrong in another culture. And, Subjective ethical relativism is individual based, the moral values and principles a person carries may be totally different to what another believes in., however, it’s a personal choice to determine what is right and wrong for each one of us. Cultural relativism does not override subjective ethical relativism. Hence, Simms’s has every right not to go along with the demands made by the Middle Eastern government official and Simms’ supervisor and she can downright turn down the ‘offer’ and stick to her own moral and ethical compass.