Business ethics final assesment PDF

Preview

Summary

final assessment based on a business persons biography...

Description

Business Ethics Final Assignment Book: ‘Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike’ by Phil Knight

(a) Defining Moments 1. In Phil Knight’s first meeting with Onitsuka in Japan when asked what company he represents he immediately says, “Blue Ribbon,” I blurted. “Gentlemen, I represent Blue Ribbon Sports of Portland, Oregon.” This can be easily identified as a defining moment because to secure Onitsuka’s interest he lies that represents Blue Ribbon Sports a nonexistent company that he makes up on the spot so as to continue his pitch to become a distributor of Onitsuka in the USA. 2. When a competing distributor who knight calls “Marlboro Man” starts growing and starts competing with national ads Knight contacts Onitsuka because he thought he was the exclusive distributor within the USA he is told Onitsuka wants a more established form with offices in the easy coast; here he lies that he does have offices on the East Coast in order to get Onitsuka to let him retain the exclusive distribution rights. By lying he was able get Marlboro Man to back off, but he had to lie to his supplier thus conflicting with decision had to be made in order to secure his business. 3. Knight uses Onitsuka employee Fujimoto as a spy against Kitami; Knight himself in a memo to his employees tells them this may be considered unethical but justifies it by saying it commonplace among Japanese businesses this is clearly a decision he had to make give warning of Onitsuka were to change their position towards his business. 4. Knight steals Kitami’s briefcase while Kitami is visiting Blue Ribbon and finds out Kitami is going to meet with other possible distributors. Knight felt guilty about this but justifies this because he believes he showed Onitsuka the American market and the changes he made to the shoes that made them more popular. 5. Against the wishes of Onitsuka and Kitami Knight goes to a Japanese trading company for finance because local banks viewed their low cash balances a bad sign, but Knight needed more credit to expand; he went against his supplier to a competing Japanese company for finance. 6. Knight creates his own shoe despite it being a violation of the contract he signed with Onitsuka; he ponders this but goes ahead because he felt they had already broken the spirit of their agreement by looking to other distributors. 7. After Knight creates the Nike brand Kitami asks if it is their stores but Knight lies, this coincides with Knight being presented legal action due to this. 8. His financiers show up to do due diligence, but they find the factory in New England was an un-approved purchase; he had to do this to expand Nike but was conflicted in that he was going behind his financiers (Nissho) backs 9. Knight has falling out with Strasser who was instrumental in developing the Jordan brand for Nike; Strasser felt he shouldn’t be taking orders from anyone and left for Adidas. Knight felt this was betrayal and let him leave despite their many years pf working together and friendship.

(b) “Sartre came to believe that there is no God and that because there is no God, there are no absolute moral rules either”; yet because of God’s nonexistence that doesn’t make anything permissible is what Sartre thought. He thought because there are objective values and that we humans as a community become the source of values through our choices. Sartre’s views on defining moments of Phil Knight would be the following. 1. Sartre would view Knights choice to lie to Onitsuka as a decision filled with anguish as Knight would have thought he would lose his opportunity if he didn’t make a choice to lie. Sartre would agree that Knight was faced with the consequence of being brushed off by Onitsuka because he didn’t represent a company and felt no choice but to lie. 2. Again, Sartre would view this defining point as situation that held dire consequences for Knight had he been upfront instead of lying about the offices Sartre would see this as acting inauthentically as well because Knight felt he had no choice but to lie to keep his position and fend off Marlboro Man. 3. Sartre would see Knight choice to use Fujimoto as a spy as being in bad faith due to Knight claiming ones actions are determined by situation as uses the situational analysis that all Japanese businesses partake in corporate espionage as reasoning to use a spy within Onitsuka. 4. Sartre would see this as acting in bad faith because Knight is stealing and justifies it to himself however Sartre states that we can never truly deceive ourselves when making a deliberate choice especially one we know is inherently wrong. 5. By going against Onitsuka’s wishes to Japanese conglomerate for finance Knight was breaking the spirit of his agreement with Onitsuka Sartre would view this as acting with bad faith as Knight knew Onitsuka would not like Blue Ribbon being involved with Nissho yet still went ahead due not getting enough credit from banks Knight might have felt he had no choice but to do this and Sartre would see this as Knight not being control of his consequences. 6. Knight thought he had to lookout for himself in case Onitsuka cut him loose and hence started his brand and breaks his agreement Knights decision is based on the situation with Kitami looking for new distributors this would be seen as acting in bad faith by Sartre. 7. Here Knight is clearly being inauthentic and acting in bad faith as Sartre would put because he lied to Kitami about Nike being in the stores and hiding the Nike products while still legally being a distributor of Onitsuka. 8. Knight decided to set up the factory without informing Nissho afraid they might not approve of rapid expansion Sartre point of view on would that Knight had to decide to weather to keep Nike alive by having their own factories hence he is deciding with authenticity because he considered the consequences and made a choice. 9. Sartre would see this a Knight making decisions because of the current situation and not taking into account how important Strasser was to Nike and the consequence of him leaving and that led to the animosity between them. (c) Sommers argues for basic concepts of personal responsibility and believes on teaching everyday ethical responsibilities such as honesty, friendship, consideration, respect. 1. Sommers would see this as failing of basic moral integrity of honesty in that Knight lies to keep his business proposal viable for Onitsuka.

2. This would be viewed as Knight not being honest with Onitsuka about how established his company actually is failing the virtue of honesty. 3. Knight stooping to what in the West would be considered indecent by hiring making use of a corporate spy, in Sommers view this would be a failing of the virtues of decency and civility no matter Knight’s justification. 4. As Sommers believes in upholding everyday values and as such, she would view Knight stealing documents in condemnation. 5. As Knight is clear breach of Onitsuka’s wishes he is breaking the virtue of honesty and common decency. 6. By breaking his agreement with Onitsuka in clear violation Knight is being indecent to them as Sommers would view this as such 7. By lying about Nike while still legally being distributor Knight was acting in bad faith without at least being upfront about his concerns he not respecting his supplier. Hence Sommers would see Knights choice in a bad light. 8. Although he was forgiven by Nissho by going behind their backs, he has put their investment in Nike at risk and as such this would be viewed as Knight failing to uphold his responsibility towards Nissho. 9. Knight here would be viewed as not upholding common decency in his behaviour towards Strasser.

(d) Nietzsche believed that power belonged to those that could grab and hold onto it through the theory of the Overman and that there are no values except what we humans decide on. This can be viewed in terms of business as well as those who make anu decision for the good of their business. 1. Nietzsche would see Knight as acting in his best interest by lying to Onitsuka about the existence of Blue Ribbon and that it was decision based purely to continue the meeting so as to make Knight’s dream of bringing Japanese quality to the shoe business. 2. Again Nietzsche would see that as Knight acting in the best interest of Blue Ribbon as Knight was holding onto his position as a distributor by lying his businesses true national presence. 3. Nietzsche would find no fault in Knight deciding to use a spy as he believed at that point Onitsuka was acting in a way that threatened his business and he used a business practice that was common among Onitsuka’s country. 4. Knight would be viewed as doing what he had to do in order keep his business alive as Kitami was looking to other distributors had not known this the business would be threatened. 5. This would seen by Nietzsche as Knight purely looking to expand his business which he could not do with any local bank, so he had to go to Nissho for finance. 6. By creating his own brand and shoe Knight is trying cover himself because expects Onitsuka to let him go this would be seen as survival by Nietzsche an act saving the business by taking precautionary measures. 7. By lying about the situation he is trying to keep the fact that Nike is in stores away from Onitsuka which at this point Knight knew for certain was not acting in his best interest and as such Nietzsche would find no fault in the decision.

8. Knight had to set up the factory so as to compete with adidas on quality as he could not rely completely on third part factories and hence this would be viewed as Knight protecting his business. 9. Nietzsche would approve Strasser’s behaviour as he was crucial in Nike’s growth and by going to Adidas he was acting in his best interest however Nietzsche see Knight was correct in his feeling towards Strasser because of this.

(e) Levinas believed in serving the other and being treated as equal. 1. In his decision to lie Levinas is acting in way that benefits only him not considering Onitsuka taking on risk by doing business with who they thought represents an established company. 2. This situation to Knight treating Onitsuka as not his equal as they want a larger established distributor, and he lies to keep his business secure. 3. Levinas would see this as acting in bad faith because Knight uses a justification to use a spy; were it Onitsuka spying on his company he would have been angry, but Knight still does it. 4. Stealing would be viewed as stooping to the lowest of lows by Levinas, an indecent tactic that does respect Kitami and Onitsuka. 5. Going against direct wishes would be seen negatively by Levinas however because the business may have fallen apart if Knight hadn’t. 6. By conspiring and creating his own brand Knight believed he was looking out for himself, but this was done at Onitsuka’s expense, Levinas would agree that Knight was putting himself above Onitsuka. 7. Levinas would see Knight in this situation as being completely in the wrong as he had created a competing brand while still being a distributor for Onitsuka. 8. Levinas would see this situation was Knight trying to expand but doing so exposed his financier to a huge risk that could have ended his business. Knight failed to treat his financer with a level of consideration. 9. In this defining moment in that both Strasser and Knight were not treating other equally leading to the quarrel and Strasser’s departure from Nike....