Stakeholder Impact Analysis, Part 2
Analyze the impact of ethical decisions on stakeholders.
1. CheckPoint: Presentation of the Stakeholders¡¦ Positions
Resource: Business & Professional Ethics
Due Date: Day 3 [Individual forum]
Read The Kardell Paper Co. Ethics Case on pp. 371-372 (Ch. 5) of the text.
Your instructor will divide the group into four discussion clusters, each representing one of the Kardell stakeholder groups: Kardell employees (the union), Kardell investors, the city of Riverside and residents, and Kardell legal counsel.
Discuss within your group how best to represent your position and desires. The discussion could provide you with ideas for how to be persuasive and how to communicate the potential impact of Kardell¡¦s actions on your stakeholder group. You are not required to discuss, but are encouraged to take advantage of the opportunity.
Prepare, individually, a presentation that represents your assigned stakeholder group¡¦s concerns and wishes for the company. Compose your presentation as though you were to deliver it to the entire board of directors of the Kardell Paper Co.
Write your presentation in 200 to 300 words using MicrosoftR Word.
2. Assignment: Presentation of the CEO¡¦s Position
Resource: Appendix C
Due Date: Day 7 [Individual forum]
Review the anonymous stakeholder presentations your instructor has posted. There is likely to be repetition among the presentations from the same group, so mentally synthesize the presentations into four positions, one for each group. You might find it helpful to take notes.
Complete the Stakeholder Analysis Table found in Appendix C based on your synthesis.
Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper in which you assume the role of Kardell¡¦s CEO. As CEO, critically examine each stakeholder position in light of the facts of the case.
Consider the strengths and weaknesses of each stakeholder position, especially how their desires for action could impact the company¡¦s profitability. Then, select a course of action from the following list:
Deny any link between the company and the sonox detected in the river and refuse to study the issue further.
Agree to continue collecting data and investigating the issue further without admitting the mill is the source of sonox.
Assume there is a link between the sonox and the company and take immediate steps to upgrade the plant to prevent future spillages.
Provide an argument in support of your decision. Support your decision with evidence and logic (not your personal opinion). An important part of your grade on this assignment is demonstrating your ability to think critically: to suspend judgment while gathering evidence and consulting the various stakeholders¡¦ positions, to analyze each position, to consider the impact of different courses of action, and then to make a decision and support it with evidence and logic.
Please see the