注意：此页面搜索的是所有试题
乐山师范学院国际商业伦理
1、 If you were to handle the crisis, what would you do?
2、 阅读所提供的商业伦理案例材料,然后回答以下问题 Exxon Mobil and the Exxon Valdez Many companies have faced a crisis during their history, whether due to external forces beyond their control, through their own failings or management problems, or a combination of the two. Only a few, however, come to personify corporate irresponsibility through one pivotal event. Such a one is Exxon’s experience with the Exxon Valdez. In 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker entered the Prince William Sound, on its way towards California. In spite of the fact that the weather and sea conditions were favorable and the Bligh Reef clearly marked on the maps, the ship ran aground and began spilling oil. Within a very short period of time, significant quantities of its 1,260,000 barrels had entered the environment. At the moment of the collision the third mate, who was not certified to take the tanker into those waters, was at the helm. The probable cause was established that the captain and many of the crew had been drinking alcohol in considerable quantities. What did the company do? According to most observers, too little and too late. The action to contain the spill was slow to get going. Just as significantly, the company completely refused to communicate openly and effectively. The Exxon Chairman, Lawrence Rawl, was immensely suspicious of the media, and reacted accordingly. Shortly after the accident had taken place,, and the world’s media had piled in to begin extensive coverage, a company spokesman pointed to the existence of procedures to cover the eventuality-procedures which the TV shots showed were demonstrably failing. When asked if Rawl would be interviewed on TV, the response was that he had no time for that kind of thing. Meanwhile the operation on the ground was getting nowhere fast. Around 240,000 barrels had been spilled, with another million still on the ship. During the first two days, when calm weather would have allowed it, little was done to contain the spillage. This spillage spread out into a 12 square mile slick. Then the weather struck, making further containment almost impossible. After more than a week, the company was still giving no ground on the request for better communication. The media clamor became so hostile that eventually Frank Iarossi, the Director of Exxon Shipping, flew to Valdez to hold a press conference. It was not a success.Small pieces of good news claimed by the company were immediately contradicted by the eyewitness accounts of the present journalists and fishermen. John Devens, the Mayor of Valdez, commented that the community felt betrayed by Exxon’s inadequate response to the crisis, in contrast to the promise they had been quick to give of how they would react in exactly this eventuality. Eventually, Rawl deigned to go onto television. He was interviewed live, and asked about the latest plans for the clean-up. It turned out he had neglected to read these, and cited the fact that it was not the job of the chairman to read such reports. He placed the blame for the crisis at the feet of the world’s media. Exxon’s catastrophe was complete. 1、Is there any safety risk on the Exxon Valdez oil tanker that may have contributed to the crisis?
3、 What were the possible ethical costs Exxon might incur in this crisis?
2、 阅读所提供的商业伦理案例材料,然后回答以下问题 Exxon Mobil and the Exxon Valdez Many companies have faced a crisis during their history, whether due to external forces beyond their control, through their own failings or management problems, or a combination of the two. Only a few, however, come to personify corporate irresponsibility through one pivotal event. Such a one is Exxon’s experience with the Exxon Valdez. In 1989, the Exxon Valdez oil tanker entered the Prince William Sound, on its way towards California. In spite of the fact that the weather and sea conditions were favorable and the Bligh Reef clearly marked on the maps, the ship ran aground and began spilling oil. Within a very short period of time, significant quantities of its 1,260,000 barrels had entered the environment. At the moment of the collision the third mate, who was not certified to take the tanker into those waters, was at the helm. The probable cause was established that the captain and many of the crew had been drinking alcohol in considerable quantities. What did the company do? According to most observers, too little and too late. The action to contain the spill was slow to get going. Just as significantly, the company completely refused to communicate openly and effectively. The Exxon Chairman, Lawrence Rawl, was immensely suspicious of the media, and reacted accordingly. Shortly after the accident had taken place,, and the world’s media had piled in to begin extensive coverage, a company spokesman pointed to the existence of procedures to cover the eventuality-procedures which the TV shots showed were demonstrably failing. When asked if Rawl would be interviewed on TV, the response was that he had no time for that kind of thing. Meanwhile the operation on the ground was getting nowhere fast. Around 240,000 barrels had been spilled, with another million still on the ship. During the first two days, when calm weather would have allowed it, little was done to contain the spillage. This spillage spread out into a 12 square mile slick. Then the weather struck, making further containment almost impossible. After more than a week, the company was still giving no ground on the request for better communication. The media clamor became so hostile that eventually Frank Iarossi, the Director of Exxon Shipping, flew to Valdez to hold a press conference. It was not a success.Small pieces of good news claimed by the company were immediately contradicted by the eyewitness accounts of the present journalists and fishermen. John Devens, the Mayor of Valdez, commented that the community felt betrayed by Exxon’s inadequate response to the crisis, in contrast to the promise they had been quick to give of how they would react in exactly this eventuality. Eventually, Rawl deigned to go onto television. He was interviewed live, and asked about the latest plans for the clean-up. It turned out he had neglected to read these, and cited the fact that it was not the job of the chairman to read such reports. He placed the blame for the crisis at the feet of the world’s media. Exxon’s catastrophe was complete. 1、Is there any safety risk on the Exxon Valdez oil tanker that may have contributed to the crisis?
3、 What were the possible ethical costs Exxon might incur in this crisis?