In week two’s readings and in-class work, we examined “corporate social responsibility” through the lens of several companies. Which of the following is true of the situation of Wells Fargo? a. Wells Fargo has a virtually unblemished history as a socially responsible organization. b. Wells Fargo employees generated more than one million “fake” accounts to meet unrealistic internal sakes goals, costing customers and employees money, time, and trouble. c. Fines for illegal and inappropriate business practices cost Wells Fargo $185M d. Both b and c are correct D

Our readings this week examined the question of how useful (or not) a company mission statement can be. Jeff Bezos concluded in the assigned article that a. They are always helpful, as they determine a company’s course of conduct and ethical practices throughout its history b. They are rarely helpful c. It is a leader’s commitment to the company mission statement that makes a difference; on its own, a mission statement is not enough. d. A strong leader takes the place of any mission statement, which is not an important component of any firm’s plan. C

Which of the discussed companies does not have a clear mission statement? a. Legos b. Lumber Liquidators c. Wells Fargo d. Amazon e. Volkswagen E

What happened at Lumber Liquidators, whose mission statement declared that they would focus on meeting the highest standards of safety of all flooring companies in the U.S.? a. They shipped products with dangerously high levels of a known carcinogen b. Many employees filed suit alleging clearly hazardous working conditions c. Throughout their history as a company, Lumber Liquidators rigorously examined their products to ensure the high levels of safety they promised would be delivered to customers d. They went out of business after their flooring proved to be obviously substandard, falling apart within weeks after installation, endangering homeowner safety. A

The Legos company, Apple, and Starbucks have something in common in their respective histories. What is it? a. Leaders were selected, or asked to return, in order to reaffirm and reestablish the corporations’ commitments to the mission statements, and founding principles, upon which each had built successful businesses from the beginning. b. Each were uniformly successful without interruption to their aggressive expansion plans. c. The core products of each were never at risk due to quality problems or competition d. Steve Jobs served as either a CEO or key advisor to each company mentioned above. A

In 2017, Volkswagen pleaded guilty as part of a $4 In 2017, Volkswagen pleaded guilty as part of a $4.7B settlement in the United States, Many Volkswagen employees and executives were charged with being responsible for the emissions scandal that emerged in 2015. Many executives and managers were specifically charged, and publicly blamed one another for the scandal occurring, which appeared to be a deliberate act of deception. This case illustrates the important lesson that a. Corporations need to keep large reserves available for lawsuits that are inevitable regardless of corporate commitments to honesty b. Corruption is inevitable c. There are many opportunities within companies of any size to suffer the effects of employees’ irresponsible behaviors, whether those behaviors were intentional or not. d. Both a and b are correct C

In deciding on an ethical, moral, and responsible course of action one might take in unclear circumstances, a key consideration is: Will my decision stand the test of time? This means: a. How likely is it I will be caught? b. How much time will it take to solve the overall problem I am responding to, and do I have enough of it to do anything at all? c. Is this a decision that will likely be affirmed as the right thing to have done as time passes? d. Will I be able to accept my role in this decision comfortably as time passes, knowing I did my best? e. Both c and d are correct E

Memorize the “template” or lens we use in the class to examine responsible course of actions. Who will be helped? Who will be hurt? What are the benefits of the action? What are the risks? Will this decision stand the test of time?