BAE Systems' Case Study (Essay Sample)

BAE Systems’ Case Study
Name of Student
Name of Instructor
Name of Institution
Date Submitted
OUTLINE
1 Task 1: Laudable decisions
2 Task 2: Standard ways of placing blames
3 Task 3: Standard normative doctrines
4 Task 4: Corporate misconduct
5 References
BAE Systems’ Case Study
Task 1: Laudable Decisions from BAE Systems’ Case Study
The decision by the Serious Fraud Office (herein referred to as SFO) to prosecute British Aerospace (herein referred to as BAE) should be applauded. This is given the fact that the decision will deter the big companies from exploiting poverty stricken communities that cannot afford to pay for their education and medical bills. This can apply to African countries such as Tanzania. The company (BAE) sold air traffic control systems to the Tanzanian government where the latter used money meant for social services such as education and health to pay for the systems (Burrows 2003). The Serious Fraud Office should present the evidence it has in court so that BAE can be prosecuted to avert this form of misconduct in the future.
Supporting of premier elections by BAE and other business is not a crime. In the international scene, requires leaders who are aggressive and influential. Tony Blair was to become salesman of the BAE products. His premier positions would give him a platform to negotiate the needs of the firms effectively.
The anti-Bribery Bills would do well in safeguarding the corporate conducts of a given firm. In this case BAE will adhere to ethical conducts but if found deviating to the conducts for example offering, promising or accepting bribes, the suggested penalties like maximum of 10-year jail sentence will be initiated. Also, the suggested law was to attract unlimited penalties to firms that exhibit corporate misconduct (Coates 2010).
Culpable Decision
The SFO decision to drop investigations on the Al-Yammah is intolerable. The UK government in this case feels that it will compromise its relationship with Saudi Arabian if it continues to investigate into allegations. The implications here is that UK want to safeguard its market grounds maintaining good relationship with its buyers. It does not look on those who are hurt but only making their interest safe.
BAE is willing to pay fine to the affected countries but not accepting the fact that has breached the corporate misconduct. This will yield no fruits in curbing such vice in the sense that the BAE will be avoiding the blame. For example it only pays the Tanzanian government as ex-gratia and not as penalties (Coates 2010). A director of forensic accounting Mr. Gavin Cunningham puts into perspective that there was no criminal penalty but is civil arrangement.
It is culpable for the British government to use its power and authority to coerce other nations to adopt its policies. This is another form of bribery and corruption. The largest arms manufacturer in Britain is guilty of corruption in the sense that it is using millions of pounds to obtain contracts from other countries including those from the third world. BAE has admitted that it is guilty of the corruption charges leveled against the company though does not fully point out to be responsible (Burrows 2003).
The BAE is using corruptible ways to win contracts. Using middlemen advisors to seal deals is inappropriate idea. They use offshore companies to carryout illegal practices is a breach of corporate misconduct. This is a way of making themselves clean and claim they are not aware what is going on offshore.
Task 2: Standard Ways of Placing Blame
Concession
Appointment of Lord Woolf to oversee on the BAE matters is not effective. In this case blame arises on the fact he is only recommending on the future conduct of BAE and not the past. It is true to say that BAE is indeed hiding something that is questionable. The effectiveness of the recommendations should be based on the evaluation of the past misconducts. Mr. Oliver suggests that Woolf needs to look in the past as well.
A concession is seen also when the Tanzanian MP say that they did not need the radar for air traffic control. It is a poor country to afford the facility. They agree that they been taken advantage of their situation by hijacking the funds meant for their welfare (Pinningtone 2002).
Justification
It is important to make the individual feel that he is indeed wrong by providing suggestions on how to operate in the future to avert such cases. It is important to note that the company has been blamed for avoiding the problem. This is given the fact that administrators delegate tasks that are likely to create controversy while at the same time performing activities that will earn them credit. It is noted that the administrators have the ability to place the blame on another person or another party even when it is obvious that the blame lies squarely on them. They do this by putting into motion complex strategies that shift the blame to another person or make it disappear altogether. A defensive mode is evident when holders of certain offices are moved from one office to the other.
Refusal and Excuse
The BAE has been to retaliate after discovering that they have been exposed to the public and the authorities have discovered their unlawful conducts (Duska 2007). They excuse themselves by inventing strategies to cover up their evil deeds. For example, the CEO of BAE supported Tony Blair’s premier campaigns. This was a strategy to ensure that those in power will suppress attempts by other parties to scuttle their plans of selling arms to other countries. Also to note is that Mike Turner refuses completely that they have done nothing wrong (Schaler 2008). He states that they are complying with SFO request and they feel that their dignity and reputations is affected.
Constructive reprimanding is the best way to place blame on another individual or a country for that matter. In this case, one should not use strong words on those in power since it can boomerang on the one placing the blame. This may harm the individual placing the blame and the society at large. For example SFO withdraws from investigating in the Al-Yammah for security matters. BAE is involved in the manufacturing of dangerous weapons that are dangerous to humanity. Mishandling such blame can make the company adopt uncontrollable measures to safeguard their business interests. Instead, one should positively inform the company about the dangers posed their business activities. The Saudi Arabia states that if not cleared, it will not corporate on counter terrorist’s activities (Greenfield 2006).
Task 3: Standard Normative Doctrines
Business ethics have both normative and descriptive dimensions. In the corporate world, it is the normative dimension that is usually applied. Individuals conducting business for the first time will usually use the descriptive dimension. Business ethicality is normally exhibited when the company is increasing profits in non-business areas. This is evident today under the ethics, codes and responsibility charter. Norms are criteria with practical significance which are capable of influencing an action. This is as opposed to norms as an abstract concept. Normative scenarios include assertions of certain passive statements. In this case, the normative cases comprise of commands, permissions as well as prohibitions. The concept of abstraction as far as normative is concerned involves sincerity, justification and honesty (Hansmann & Kraakman 2000).
Norm is mostly defined by orders and permission. In this form of abstraction, the world is not always portrayed as it is. On the contrary, the world is portrayed as it should appear. Declarative and imperative phrases are usually used to describe norms. As far as law is concerned, declarative phrases are more appropriate. It is also important to note that an expressed norm is dependent on phrase assertion. For example, descriptive norms can as well be used as the definition of a norm (Huevel et al. 2009).
Deontological Norms
It is important to discuss deontic norms. This is the same as permissions and obligations. These are norms postulating the duties that should be embraced. Such norms also form symbols such as national symbols used in a country. These are symbols such as the flags and the national anthem. The national symbols can be used to form political affiliations with other nations around the world. It is also noted that regions can be formed inside a nation which is being governed by administrative principles (Cory 2004). The norm will become irrelevant if such consequences are omitted. For example BAE becomes ethical incorrect if it violets the corporate conducts. Bribing to acquire contract is unlawful. Denying citizen social services so as to deliver weapons is an insulting the dignity of the Tanzanians. Tolerance of corruption and bribing by the corporate is unethical. All those involved in the arms trade have tolerated corruption either by bribing or being bribed. All of these attributes can be conceptualized under the auspices of competence (Richard 2005).
Consequentialist Doctrines
These doctrines hold that improper course of action will cause untold consequences. They include happiness as well as harm to the individual. To achieves this, proper actions are improvised to increase good conditions for working. It is the moral worth of actions. For best conditions to be achieved, utilitarian principles dominate as opposed to being abused. The BAE Company abuses this principle and the happiness of the existing clients is affected. The SFO comes in to investigate BAE and other organizations to restore utilitarian principle. This principle is divided into two categories; act and rule. Act determines consequences when choosing a particular option whereby the pleasurable option is preferred. Rule al...