Stakeholder Management Assignment Help

Stakeholder Management Assignment Help In order to determine smooth functioning of business, it is very important to have proper control over stakeholders of the company (Freeman, Harrison & Wicks, 2007). In relation to this case, the major stakeholders are Joe, District Manager of Computer Operations, Mary, Division Manager, Information Systems and John, President and CEO of the company. All these stakeholders have different interest in the organization. The interest of Joe was limited to smooth computer operation in his district. In similar way, the interest of Mary was to provide its CEO with the positive feedback regarding the operation system and maintain a balance between the upper management and lower management. Lastly the interest of CEO was to determine the growth of company in any mean (Huber & Scharioth, 2003). The main concern of the CEO was to increase the performance of organization.

Legal Analysis The case has violated various laws but the major law that it has violated is the law of Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As the company does not give value to the employees’ concern and presents wrong figures regarding the efficiency of its system, it has violated the Act of Sarbanes-Oxley. This law is mostly suited to the case because of the similarities of negligence of activities that are not allowed with the Act (Buchholtz & Carroll, 2011). The act determines the principle of corporate responsibility within the organization, but CEO itself is not concerned of this responsibility. Instead of taking actions against the persons involved in the purchase of high cost ineffective system, a letter is being written regarding the smooth functioning of system to the employees. Apart from this, the Act of Sarbanes-Oxley also determines smooth flow of information within the organization that is not being carried within the case. In this case, the most important person responsible for violation of code of conduct is John, the CEO of the company. If the higher level management will not show any determination against such actions, it is not possible to expect such actions from the lower or middle level management (Allhoff & Vaidya, 2008). The Divisional Manager is also responsible for this fraud in the organization. As the Act states that altering any data related to the business for personal benefit comes under fraud, the Divisional Manager has also contributed in the fraudulent case in the company.

Ethical Analysis Stakeholder management case study assignment help said that, Ethical analysis of the case is very important as it determines the way the frauds could be managed in the organization. Following different result might be derived out of using different theories related to the case: Categorical imperative theory: With the use of this theory, there would be maximum chances for Joe, the District Manager of computer operation to refuse writing such letter to employee stating that everything is functioning well. As Joe is concerned towards the growth of organization, he would never write such reply to the employee complaining about inefficiency of the system (Chinyio, 2010). Instead of this, Joe would have been raised the issue in the general meeting to make everyone aware from the situation of the company. Utilitarian theory: If this theory would have been applied for decision making then before the complaint of the employee, the system would have been replaced with new effective system as Joe has also informed regarding this inefficiency earlier. As the theory states the actions of the stakeholders should be for the benefit of company and in this case, the benefit of the company was to remove the system with an effective system (Freeman, Harrison & Wicks, 2007). Rights theory: With the use of this theory, the rights of each stakeholder to the organization need to be protected. As the theory is based on the organizational goals and priorities, the decision would be in the favor of organization (Huber & Scharioth, 2003). The key personnel involved in the fraud would have been fired, so that it could easily carry-out protecting the right of organization. Justice theory: Under this theory, the organization is allowed to take any action to obtain its goals and objectives. The decision maker would have asked Joe to keep quiet and let the things going on as it is going. As the objective of organization was to determine its growth, the way it followed cannot be regarded wrong with this theory. The act of misjudging the efficiency of system will be allowed with this theory.

Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that the company was facing with a great problem that could lead to its insolvency in near future also. As the company is in practice of fraudulent activities with the knowledge of CEO, it is very difficult to determine long-term sustainability of organization. Although Joe has tried to bring this into the notice of management, but the involvement of top level management was also unable to manage this effectively. In order to manage this situation effectively, organization should strictly follow the code of conduct and maintain the transparency in the system. With the transparency, one would not be able to implement ineffective system at such a high price. At the same time, the use of Utilitarian theory of business ethics would be most appropriate for the organization to take effective decisions. With the help of this theory, it would be easy to identify the drawbacks in the system and replace them as early as possible. Apart from this, Joe would have brought this situation into the notice of the board members. As it is the responsibility of the board members to take actions against such cases that are affecting growth of the organization. With the situation coming into the notice of board members, it would not be easy for CEO to misguide the firm. References Allhoff, F. & Vaidya, A. (2008). Business in Ethical Focus: An Anthology. Canada: Broadview Press. Buchholtz, A. & Carroll, A. (2011). Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management. USA: Cengage Learning. Chinyio, E. (2010). Construction Stakeholder Management. USA: John Wiley & Sons. Freeman, R., Harrison, J. & Wicks, A. (2007). Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation, and Success. USA: Yale University Press. Huber, M. & Scharioth, J. (2003). Achieving Excellence in Stakeholder Management. Germany: Springer. You can get 24×7 business assignment help from our experts. We are the most trusted assignment writers and have 15 years experience of providing assignment help to US,UK and Australian students. You can first check our assignment writing services then you can confirm your assignment with us. So hurry up and contact us for original assignment help at