CH-9 Business Ethics and Technology – Business and Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management : Book Guide

Chapter 9 Business Ethics and Technology SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Students should recognize that their answers to these discussion questions should be well reasoned and supported with evidence. Although some answers will be more correct than others, students should be aware that simplistic answers to complex questions, problems, or issues such as these will never be “good” answers. How does technology influence the work-life balance of employees, and what ethical considerations arise from the expectation of constant availability in the modern business landscape? One interesting issue related to technology is the fact that the number of hours that Americans work is increasing, not decreasing. As Jeremy Rifkin notes in The End of Work, the primary view of technology’s effects on work would be to provide increasing amounts of leisure. One need look no further than the cartoon series The Jetsons to capture the visions of Rifkin’s “techno-paradise.” Some students will rightfully point out that it is not technology per se that makes us work longer hours—that is a decision we make based on our value systems. However, technology has driven an expectation of constant availability in business – if you aren’t available – someone else will be. In order to remain competitive, employees feel constant pressure to be accessible. While employees may wish to clearly segregate work and personal lives, they may find it increasingly difficult to do so. This is exactly the point that should be made. How we decide to use technology is the ethical issue that we confront. On the other hand, technology has increased our ability to access relevant data in an expedient manner and to market ourselves and our businesses. Tasks that once took weeks to complete (as workers had to rely on traditional methods to obtain forms, information, printed materials, etc.) now can be completed and transmitted in a matter of minutes. Further, social media platforms now remove certain barriers of entry for business and individual marketing. What evidence and arguments does the provided answer from "Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management" present to support the assertion that society is intoxicated with technology? I agree that our society is intoxicated with technology. Whether one concurs with each of the six symptoms identified in High Tech / High Touch is not really the point—we need look no further than popular attitudes about technological unemployment and global warming to provide convincing evidence that we are intoxicated with technology. In the case of unemployment, the prevailing attitude is that new types of jobs will come from somewhere, regardless of our inability to identify the source. “We’ll invent something…” With global warming, many people ignore the fact that the widespread use of technology is the primary cause of global warming and claim that new technology (yet to be invented or even conceptualized) will allow us to avoid this coming disaster. What are the ethical considerations surrounding the use of technology by businesses in terms of customer privacy and employee surveillance, and how might these considerations vary between the private sphere and the workplace? Although it would be foolish to expect that business would not use all of the technology available to it to enhance its operations, I do think that business invades the privacy of its customers. Certainly, the concepts of “right to privacy” and “expectation of privacy” are recognized in the court systems. Sitting in the privacy of my home and using the Internet is not an invitation to hundreds or thousands of companies to send me emails or to push advertisements onto my computer screen. Nor should my purchase of a particular product subject me to a multitude of follow-up solicitations to buy other products. Further, I should not have to be concerned with how my information will be used or if it will be sold when it is necessary for me to provide such information to certain businesses. Employees, on the other hand, do not have the same rights or expectations to privacy in the workplace. As noted in a later chapter, businesses can record employee phone calls and review employee e-mails as long as such activities occur in the ordinary course of business. As a result, students should have few expectations to privacy in the workplace and conduct themselves accordingly. According to an April 2007 Wall Street Journal article, a case involving employee surveillance at Walmart is a good reminder to students regarding workplace privacy. In connection with work related activities, Walmart monitored not only its employees’ phone calls and e-mails from the Walmart server, but also the e-mails sent from the employees’ personal e-mail accounts (yahoo, hotmail, gmail, etc.) when such e-mails were sent from work. Employer surveillance also can occur in connection with employees’ social media accounts, although businesses should carefully consider when and if they will observe employee information in this medium. What are the ethical implications of using cell phones and text messaging in the business context, as discussed in the 'Business Ethics and Technology' chapter of the book 'Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management'? There are ethical implications to the use of cell phones and text messaging for business, whether managers want to acknowledge them or not. Any time that one person’s actions affect another, there is a potential ethical situation involved. In the case of cell phone use and text messaging, these issues can range from the mild annoyance caused to others who may be forced to listen to a one-sided telephone conversation or watch an individual texting to life threatening situations when a driver is talking or texting on the cell phone. All of these potential ethical issues are exacerbated by employers’ pressure to “get more done.” In addition to the bystanders who are affected in ways noted above, the employee is also subjected to the pressure to always be available to customers, co-workers, and managers. With a company-provided cell phone, many employees are expected to be available literally any time someone calls them or to respond to text messages day or night. The effects on the employee’s personal life can be devastating. This constant pressure also impacts business because many employees will leave their current employer when the pressure becomes too much in search of a better opportunity. This translates into dollars and manpower lost for companies. What ethical considerations should be prioritized when addressing the conflict between the rights of consumers and the interests of corporations, particularly in the context of genetically modified foods (GMFs), and how should these considerations influence regulatory policies and labeling practices? When weighing the needs and rights of companies versus consumers, I think it is plain that individuals should be given clear preference over corporations. Our history is rife with examples of harms done to people by companies selling products whose effects were unknown or not fully understood (e.g., asbestos, lead in gasoline, tobacco, etc.). However, there seems to be growing support from government groups that GMFs are safe for human consumption. As the textbook notes, the World Health Organization claims that current GMFs have passed risk assessments and that human health has not been affected by the consumption of such foods in countries where they have been approved. However, while certain groups may continue to assert that GMFs are not likely to present risks to human health, public perception may be another matter. The text also notes a majority of consumers would not purchase a GMF product (although it is virtually impossible to avoid this). Consequently, warning labels that indicate that a product is a GMF should be required. Consumers have a right to information that is clear and not misleading. If GMF foods are properly labeled, then the consumer is free to make an informed choice regarding consumption. This is not unfair to the GMF industry, especially if it merely alerts the customer that the product is a GMF. It is arguably unfair to the consumer, however, when he or she is not informed that a product is a GMF. GROUP ACTIVITIES Group Activity 1 - Technology Matters Have students create a Facebook group where they can discuss concerns regarding employee and consumer privacy. Encourage students to invite other students from outside the class. Remind students about defamation laws and that they will have little to no privacy with regards to the information that they post on Facebook. In fact, it has been noted that many employers will access Facebook to review a student’s profile prior to a job interview (many jobs have been lost due to the Facebook review). Students should discuss how the Facebook project has impacted their perceptions regarding employee and consumer privacy. Group Activity 1: Exploring Employee and Consumer Privacy on Social Media Objective: The objective of this group activity is to facilitate a discussion among students about concerns regarding employee and consumer privacy on social media platforms, particularly Facebook. Instructions: Ask students to create a Facebook group specifically for discussing issues related to employee and consumer privacy. Encourage students to invite other students from outside the class to join the group, expanding the discussion to a wider audience. Remind students about defamation laws and the potential lack of privacy on social media platforms like Facebook. Emphasize that employers often review candidates' social media profiles, and inappropriate content could negatively impact job prospects. Instruct students to engage in discussions within the Facebook group about their perceptions and concerns regarding employee and consumer privacy. Encourage them to share personal experiences, news articles, and relevant research findings. Facilitate the group discussions by posing thought-provoking questions, such as: How do you define privacy in the context of social media? What are the potential risks of employers accessing employees' or job candidates' social media profiles? How does consumer privacy intersect with corporate practices on social media platforms? What steps can individuals take to protect their privacy online? How can companies balance the need for social media monitoring with respecting employee and consumer privacy rights? Encourage students to critically analyze the impact of the Facebook project on their perceptions of privacy in the digital age. Remind students to adhere to ethical guidelines and respectful communication practices while participating in the discussions. Provide opportunities for students to share their insights and reflections from the discussions with the class. Discussion Points: The implications of employers reviewing social media profiles during the hiring process. The potential risks of sharing personal information on social media platforms. The role of social media companies in safeguarding user privacy. Strategies for protecting privacy online and navigating social media responsibly. Conclusion: Encourage students to reflect on the insights gained from the group discussions and consider how they can apply this knowledge to their own online behavior and interactions. Emphasize the importance of maintaining a balance between leveraging the benefits of social media while being mindful of privacy concerns. This group activity encourages students to engage in meaningful discussions about the complexities of employee and consumer privacy in the digital age, fostering critical thinking and awareness of ethical issues surrounding social media use. Group Activity 2 - Bioethics Debate Students should be divided into groups to debate issues related to bioethics. Each group should be assigned to argue for or against one of the following topics: cloning, cloning animals for food, genetic testing and profiling, and genetically modified foods. The instructor should then host a debate where each group in favor of a particular issue will debate the group against a particular issue. Students, along with the instructor, should determine the two most persuasive groups in the class. The two best teams should then debate the issue of stem cell research, including whether or not the practice should receive federal funding from the government. For the Group Activity 2 - Bioethics Debate, here's a breakdown of how you could structure it: 1. Preparation: Divide students into groups, assigning each group a specific bioethics topic to argue for or against. Topics: Cloning Cloning animals for food Genetic testing and profiling Genetically modified foods 2. Research and Preparation: Give students time to research their assigned topic thoroughly. Encourage them to gather evidence, statistics, and ethical arguments to support their stance. 3. Debate Format: Arrange a debate session where each group will argue for or against their assigned topic. Each group should present their arguments, followed by a rebuttal from the opposing group. Encourage respectful and constructive dialogue. 4. Evaluation: After each debate, allow time for class discussion and reflection on the arguments presented. Encourage students to critically analyze the ethical implications of each topic. 5. Selection of Top Groups: With input from the class, identify the two most persuasive groups based on their arguments, evidence, and presentation skills. 6. Final Debate: The two best teams will debate the issue of stem cell research. This debate should include arguments for and against federal funding for stem cell research. Follow the same format as the previous debates, with presentations and rebuttals. 7. Conclusion: Facilitate a discussion on the overall experience of the debate. Encourage students to reflect on the complexity of bioethical issues and the importance of critical thinking in evaluating them. By following these steps, you can conduct an engaging and thought-provoking bioethics debate that encourages students to consider various perspectives and develop their argumentation skills. Group Activity 3 - Bioethics Movie Night Invite groups of students to watch the movie Gattaca, starring Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman. This movie is about a world where most babies are genetically designed to excel in various areas. Individuals who do not elect to genetically engineer their children ensure that their offspring will be societal outcasts. Within this context, the story revolves around a naturally-birthed individual who dreams of becoming an astronaut. In order to achieve this dream, he assumes the identity of a genetically engineered athlete. Students should explore the ethical dilemmas that may result from the idea of creating a genetically superior race. Have students prepare a movie review where they express their opinion regarding the ethical issues this movie raises. That sounds like a fascinating and thought-provoking activity! "Gattaca" is rich with ethical questions about the implications of genetic engineering and the potential consequences of a society where genetic superiority is prized above all else. In their movie reviews, students might explore various ethical dilemmas raised by the film, such as: Eugenics and Discrimination: Discuss the ethical implications of a society where individuals are judged and discriminated against based on their genetic makeup. Is it fair to label someone as inferior or superior based solely on their genes? Autonomy and Freedom: Consider the freedom of individuals to choose their own destinies versus the pressure to conform to societal expectations of genetic perfection. Is it ethical for parents to make decisions about their children's genetic makeup without their consent? Inequality and Social Justice: Explore how genetic engineering could exacerbate existing social inequalities, as only the wealthy would have access to expensive genetic enhancements. How might this perpetuate social injustice? Identity and Authenticity: Reflect on the protagonist's struggle with identity and the ethical implications of assuming someone else's genetic identity to achieve his dreams. Does genetic modification undermine individual authenticity and uniqueness? Health and Enhancement: Examine the distinction between using genetic engineering for medical purposes versus enhancement. Is there a line between treating genetic disorders and enhancing desirable traits, and if so, where should it be drawn? Unintended Consequences: Consider the potential unintended consequences of widespread genetic engineering, such as loss of genetic diversity or unforeseen health risks. How do we weigh the benefits against the risks? Students may draw on ethical theories such as utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics to analyze these dilemmas and form their own opinions. Encouraging respectful discussion and debate can help students explore these complex issues from multiple perspectives. Overall, "Gattaca" provides an excellent springboard for deepening students' understanding of bioethics and sparking critical thinking about the ethical implications of advancing genetic technologies. INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT Have students read Stem Cell Now by Christopher Thomas Scott. While the main focus of the book is on the science of stem cell research, Scott also explores the ethical and moral issues involved with the use of embryonic stem cells for research purposes (a practice that remains controversial in political, religious and medical circles). After reading this book, students should summarize what they have learned regarding the scientific possibilities of stem cell research and the ethical issues associated with such research. Students also should discuss whether they are in favor of embryonic stem cell research and support their position with appropriate data. Finally, students should explore whether the government should provide federal funding for stem cell research. There's a structured response to the assignment: Scientific Possibilities of Stem Cell Research: "Stem Cell Now" by Christopher Thomas Scott illuminates the vast potential of stem cell research in revolutionizing medical treatment. Stem cells, with their unique ability to differentiate into various cell types, hold promise for treating a myriad of diseases and injuries, including Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, and diabetes. Through techniques like induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), researchers can generate patient-specific cells for personalized medicine. Furthermore, stem cells offer insights into developmental biology and disease mechanisms, enhancing our understanding of human biology. Ethical Issues Associated with Stem Cell Research: Scott delves into the ethical conundrum surrounding embryonic stem cell research. The use of embryonic stem cells raises ethical concerns regarding the destruction of human embryos, invoking debates on the sanctity of life and the moral status of embryos. Additionally, questions arise concerning consent, exploitation, and the slippery slope towards unethical practices. These ethical dilemmas necessitate careful consideration and regulation to balance scientific advancement with moral integrity. Personal Stance on Embryonic Stem Cell Research: In light of the scientific advancements and ethical deliberations presented, my stance on embryonic stem cell research leans towards cautious support. While acknowledging the ethical complexities involved, the potential benefits for humanity, including alleviating suffering and advancing medical knowledge, warrant exploration. Furthermore, stringent ethical guidelines and oversight can mitigate concerns regarding the ethical implications, ensuring responsible and ethical research practices. Government Funding for Stem Cell Research: The question of whether the government should provide federal funding for stem cell research is contentious. Federal funding plays a crucial role in driving scientific innovation, enabling researchers to pursue groundbreaking discoveries that may not be feasible through private funding alone. However, the allocation of taxpayer money towards controversial research areas, such as embryonic stem cell research, requires careful consideration of public opinion, ethical principles, and scientific merit. Ultimately, a balanced approach that prioritizes scientific advancement while respecting ethical boundaries is essential in determining government funding for stem cell research. This response encapsulates key points from the book while offering a thoughtful analysis of the scientific and ethical dimensions of stem cell research, along with a nuanced discussion on government funding. Chapter 10 Ethical Issues in the Global Arena SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO DISCUSSION QUESTIONS Students should recognize that their answers to these discussion questions should be well reasoned and supported with evidence. Although some answers will be more correct than others, students should be aware that simplistic answers to complex questions, problems, or issues such as these will never be “good” answers. How do ethical considerations play out in global business scenarios such as the Nestlé infant formula case, the Union Carbide incident, and Google's decision to exit the Chinese market? How might managers navigate ethical dilemmas when operating in different cultural, regulatory, and socio-political contexts? One of the things that students must keep in mind is that they have the benefit of hindsight, and that case writers have analyzed the events to point out the errors that occurred in each of these cases. This question requires that we approach the situations as if we were in the time period before these events took place, without knowledge of what is about to happen. In the Nestlé case, managers probably thought they were doing something not only ethical, but also extremely beneficial to inhabitants of the tropical locales. The company was providing powdered infant formula that was easily transported and that provided the necessary nutrients for the healthy development of small children. It is quite possible that the problems of impure water supplies never entered their minds, and consequently the problems with the mothers’ breast milk drying up would not have been an issue either. The main ethical issue emerges when Nestlé managers did find out about the problems. At that point, I would have to say that they became immoral managers—they knew a problem existed, and rather than correct the situation, they elected to deny it and continued to actively market their product. In the Union Carbide incident, it is a fine line between amoral and immoral management. The key issue in this case is the fact that the plant was constructed pursuant to lower standards than those required in the United States. Presuming that the U.S. standards were in place in order to assure safety, it seems that the Union Carbide managers made a conscious decision to place a higher risk of accident on the employees and citizens of India than it imposed on its American workers. This is a direct violation of Kant’s categorical imperative, “treat people only as ends, never as means.” If Union Carbide had followed this maxim, it would have decided to adhere to the higher standards, simply to ensure the safety of its Indian stakeholders. While many critics claim that Google’s exit from China may have been motivated by the company’s desire to protect its intellectual property and as a result of certain security breaches, Google management maintains that its decision was due to the company’s unwillingness to continue to censor content on the Chinese version of its search engine. Although some argue that Google’s original agreement to censor anti-Chinese search results was unethical, and, hence, immoral management, Google stressed that its initial entry into the Chinese market was necessary in order to facilitate additional access to information for Chinese users. Some would classify Google’s decision to reverse course as moral management, since the company has placed a premium on certain personal liberties (e.g., freedom of speech) at the expense of corporate profit. What guiding principle does the provided answer from "Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management" suggest for addressing ethical issues in the global arena, and how does it advocate for the application of this principle? To me, the answer to this question seems quite simple and straightforward—use the “higher” ethical standard, regardless of whose it is, how much it costs or the ethical issue involved. One would find it difficult to encounter trouble for using a higher ethical standard. If adhering to the higher standard is cost prohibitive, then the decision would simply be to forego that particular opportunity. If the only way to make a profit is to lower one’s ethical standards, then one should find another way to make money. Further, managers are not free to “pick and choose” the ethical standards of the home or host country depending on the ethical issue involved. Such an approach could lead to management justifying certain actions that would clearly be considered unethical in one of the countries and could lead to ethical relativism. What are the distinctions between grease payments and bribes in the context of global business ethics, and how do these distinctions impact decision-making for businesses operating in foreign countries? A grease payment is an expected, small, customary payment to an official in order to get him or her to do whatever s/he was supposed to do in the first place. We often think of grease payments as existing only in foreign countries (e.g., paying a customs officer to approve the delivery of personal luggage), but in some sense, paying a bellhop to carry your bags into a hotel, or giving a waiter a tip to deliver your meal could also be viewed in this manner. On the other hand, a bribe is a larger sum that is provided in order to get the recipient to make a choice that favors the briber or to do something that he is not required to do. Paying a government official to select your firm’s contract to provide a service, rather than your competitor’s, would be considered a bribe. What strategies could emerging economies like Russia, China, and India adopt to address bribery and corruption, as discussed in the 'Ethical Issues in the Global Arena' chapter of the book 'Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management'? This question is left to the class instructor as time and events will have altered the information available at the time this is being written. While Russia, China and India are all countries with emerging economies, the textbook notes that these countries could do more do deter bribery and corruption. If these countries want to improve their TI rankings, they not only need to pass more stringent anti-bribery and anticorruption laws, they also need to make sure that the laws are enforced. The best way to accomplish this objective is for each country to make sure that all actions covered by the laws are subject to public scrutiny and that the officials in charge of implementing and following the laws are held accountable. How can multinational corporations effectively address and mitigate ethical challenges in the global arena, particularly regarding bribery and corruption, and what specific strategies and initiatives should they implement to promote ethical behavior and compliance across their global operations? As noted in the text, companies can improve global ethics by (1) developing worldwide codes of conduct, (2) factoring ethics into global strategy, (3) suspending activities when faced with unbridgeable ethical gaps, and (4) developing periodic “ethical impact statements.” According to a report issued by The Conference Board and the Ethics and Compliance Officers Association (ECOA), the following are five key steps that companies can take to fight bribery and corruption: 1. High-level Commitment by Top Management 2. Detailed Statements of Policies and Operating Procedures 3. Training and Discussion of Policies and Procedures 4. Hotlines and Helplines for All Organizational Members 5. Investigative Follow-Up, Reporting, and Disclosure GROUP ACTIVITY Divide students into groups of four to five students. Ask each group to draft a general global code of conduct that could be used by any multi-national corporation. Students should explore which issues might be difficult to implement on a global scale (i.e., issues related to gifts/bribes, discrimination concerns, sexual harassment, etc.). Students should reach a resolution on how to implement global standards in their respective codes regarding these issues. Students also should contemplate the steps that they would need to take to make their code accessible to employees (posting it on the internet, translating it into various languages, etc.). Here's how the group could approach drafting a general global code of conduct: General Global Code of Conduct for Multi-National Corporations: 1. Anti-Bribery and Corruption: • Prohibit offering, soliciting, or accepting bribes or kickbacks in any form. • Implement clear guidelines on gifts, entertainment, and hospitality, ensuring compliance with local laws and cultural norms. • Provide training to employees on recognizing and reporting bribery and corruption. 2. Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunity: • Ensure equal opportunities for employment, promotion, and training, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability, or other protected characteristics. • Establish procedures for addressing discrimination complaints promptly and impartially. • Promote diversity and inclusion within the workplace through recruitment practices and diversity training. 3. Sexual Harassment and Workplace Respect: • Zero-tolerance policy for sexual harassment in any form, including verbal, physical, or visual harassment. • Provide avenues for reporting harassment confidentially and without fear of retaliation. • Conduct regular training sessions to raise awareness of sexual harassment and foster a respectful workplace culture. 4. Environmental Sustainability and Corporate Responsibility: • Commit to minimizing environmental impact through sustainable practices and resource conservation. • Adhere to all relevant environmental laws and regulations in every operating region. • Engage in community outreach and corporate social responsibility initiatives to contribute positively to society. Implementing Global Standards: 1. Resolving Difficulties: • Establish a centralized compliance team responsible for addressing discrepancies between local laws and global standards. • Encourage open communication channels for employees to raise concerns or seek clarification on ethical dilemmas. • Regularly review and update the code of conduct to adapt to changing regulatory environments and societal expectations. 2. Accessibility: • Post the code of conduct on the company's internal portal and intranet for easy access by employees. • Translate the code into multiple languages to ensure comprehension by diverse workforce demographics. • Conduct mandatory training sessions for all employees to familiarize them with the code and its implications. Conclusion: A global code of conduct serves as a guiding framework for multi-national corporations to uphold ethical standards and promote responsible business practices worldwide. By addressing challenges such as bribery, discrimination, and sexual harassment with transparency and accountability, companies can foster a culture of integrity and respect across all regions of operation. This approach ensures that the code of conduct addresses key ethical issues while providing practical strategies for implementation and accessibility across diverse cultural and linguistic contexts. INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT Ask students to categorize the following as a facilitating payment (grease payment), a bribe or neither of these under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Students should explain why they chose a certain answer. Jane Jones, who works for XYZ Corporation (a U.S. publicly-traded company), has documents that she needs to clear customs in order to make it to an important business meeting on time. She decides to pay the customs official $500 in order to move to the front of the line. Same facts as above, but Jane decides to pay the customs official $5000. Jane gives a steel letter opener with XYZ Corporation imprinted on it to a foreign government official as a gift. The country where a major foreign client is based was recently hit by a devastating earthquake. Competitors of XYZ Corporation are donating approximately $150,000 each to foreign relief efforts. XYZ Corporation also decides to donate a similar amount. Here's how the students could categorize each scenario under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), along with explanations: 1. Scenario 1: • Category: Facilitating Payment (Grease Payment) • Explanation: This payment of $500 to expedite the customs process could be considered a facilitating payment or grease payment under the FCPA. Facilitating payments are small payments made to expedite routine governmental actions, such as processing paperwork or obtaining permits, where such payments are customary and necessary to expedite non-discretionary services. Since Jane is paying the customs official to move to the front of the line, a routine action, it may be considered a facilitating payment. However, it's important to note that even facilitating payments are subject to scrutiny under the FCPA, and companies should have strict policies and controls in place regarding such payments. 2. Scenario 2: • Category: Bribe • Explanation: This payment of $5000 exceeds the threshold of a facilitating payment and could be considered a bribe under the FCPA. Unlike facilitating payments, which are small and made to expedite routine actions, this larger payment suggests an intent to influence the customs official's discretionary decision-making, such as granting preferential treatment. Bribery involves offering or providing something of value to improperly influence the recipient's actions, and paying a significant sum to move to the front of the line would likely fall under this category. 3. Scenario 3: • Category: Neither • Explanation: Giving a steel letter opener with XYZ Corporation's imprint to a foreign government official as a gift could fall under neither a facilitating payment nor a bribe under the FCPA, depending on the circumstances. Gifts given in the ordinary course of business, such as promotional items of nominal value, are generally permissible under the FCPA. However, if the gift is extravagant or given with the intent to improperly influence the recipient's actions, it could be considered a bribe. In this case, since the letter opener is a promotional item with the company's logo and likely of nominal value, it may not be considered a bribe, but caution should be exercised to ensure compliance with relevant laws and company policies regarding gifts and entertainment. 4. Scenario 4: • Category: Neither • Explanation: XYZ Corporation's decision to donate to foreign relief efforts following a devastating earthquake in the country where a major foreign client is based does not fall under the categories of facilitating payments or bribes under the FCPA. Donations made for legitimate charitable purposes, such as humanitarian aid in response to a natural disaster, are generally permissible under the FCPA, provided they are not used as a guise for bribery or corruption. XYZ Corporation's decision to donate to foreign relief efforts aligns with corporate social responsibility and is not intended to improperly influence government officials or gain an unfair business advantage. By categorizing each scenario and providing explanations, students can demonstrate their understanding of the FCPA's provisions regarding facilitating payments, bribes, and permissible activities. Solution Manual for Business and Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management Archie B. Carroll, Ann K. Buchholtz 9780538453165