To bribe or not to bribe, that is the question.

Ethics and Governance for the Global Enterprise-Final Paper

Presented to

Team 6
4405 B2

Case A
Rahul was frantically pacing in his office cubicle, contemplating his next move. He was rapidly getting overwhelmed with the dilemma he was in. He could not figure out exactly what his next move should be. In his mind, it was clear what he needed to do, but the left side of his brain egged him on to act otherwise. Rahul never imagined himself to be in such a situation in a software professionals job. He always thought that standards of ethics of people in this industry were an aberration of the typical ethical standards one might assume to be in Indian work place where most employees are indifferent towards corruption. Rahul had always been a bright engineering student in college and in his final year, he has secured an offer for a lucrative job in PSS IT Solutions, Bangalore as a software developer. He had quickly escalated to the position of a module lead within two years time, a feat which took others to achieve in five years time. He had five software engineers reporting to him, and he, in turn, reported to his project manager Alok, along with two other module leads Aakash and Samir. The economic recession in 2008 heavily deterred the business in the IT sector, and PSS IT Solutions was no exception. Business was bleak and his team required projects to keep his team funded. Otherwise the team was staring at the prospects of the layoff of the entire team. Very ominously, a project opened up in the Bangalore which required a software solution for the automation of billing for the water utilities department of the Bangalore Municipal Corporation. All software companies were to file tenders (bids) for their proposal for the budget of the software, and the lowest tender would get selected. Rahul and his team mates were enthused with the prospect of taking on this project, as it ensured the survival of his team. But a nagging undertone of anxiety and insecurity also crept in

their minds, as it was not a given that their team would be selected for the project. Sure, his team had done its due diligence to ensure that the bid was reasonably priced and that they could not go any lower, but that did not guarantee a lower bid from competitors. Over a meeting between the module leads and the project manager, Samir proposed to the team to approach one of the government clerks in the Bangalore municipality. He knew the clerk personally, and the clerk had suggested that he would furnish Samir with the lowest bid the municipal department received, in exchange for a bribe. This would enable their team to file for the lowest tender, thus ensuring their teams selection for the project. Rahul internally laughed at the suggestion, and anticipated strong words from Alok for Samir. But to his astonishment, Alok further inquired about this option and asked Samir how much it would cost the team for the information of this kind. Samir estimated the bribe to be in the amounts of approximately Rs 100,000. Rahul was both bewildered and appalled at the same time with the idea of bribing their way for the selection of this project. He could not fathom that the team was actually thinking of going ahead with the plan. But he noticed that Aakash, the other module lead, was shifting uneasily in his chair and he was giving a vibe of discomfort with the idea. Even so, he said nothing and just went along with Alok and Samir. Rahul voiced his opinion against any such action but he was immediately shut down by Alok, who said that he was not interested in Rahuls holier than thou attitude, and that the times were dire, and it was not a time to be judgmental and that they rather needed to be practical. With no intentions of aggravating his boss further, Rahul kept quiet. Although he had been harshly quieted down by his boss, Rahul was still not comfortable with the idea of bribing the clerk. As he was pacing in his cubicle, he contemplated that he had three action plans he could work on. One, go to Sriram, the group project manager, to whom Alok reported and fill him in to the situation and in his estimate, Sriram would take the appropriate actions to neutralize the

situation. Another option was to go to the ethics board in the company, seek their advice and leave the ethics board to take corrective actions against the issue. But both these action plans were not a good idea, as Rahul estimated that if Sriram or the Ethics board thought otherwise, the consequences for his career would be devastating. He would get fired and never get a recommendation letter from the company to apply for jobs elsewhere, which lead to his third option, of doing nothing about it. This seemed the safest option, but he knew that he would never forgive himself if he went ahead with the plan.

Stakeholder Analysis
Rahuls mind is continuously thinking of all the consequences of his possible steps. He is also trying to analyze why everyone is not opposing the idea even when they know this is illegal. Rahul is the only champion against the idea of bribery. He is totally disenchanted with the way his team is ready to put the companys values and its reputation at stake. If this news leaks to the media, it will have very bad ramifications on the companys brand reputation. But above all doing anything like this is totally against the set of personal and moral values he has grown up with. All these things are forcing him to raise voice against his project manager and take some corrective measures. However, as soon as he decides to go against his project manager in his mind, he starts envisioning the consequences. He thinks of his impeccable career so far, and he does not want to jeopardize his fast growing career in the company by getting tagged as trouble maker or a whistle blower. Rahul then thinks of his opponents Alok and the other module lead Samir and tries to figure out what is on stake for them. The entire teams future depends on Alok. At present the team is in desperate need of a new project.

Rahul also tries to figure out whom can he approach regarding this sensitive issue. Group Manager Sriram is one person who always appreciates him for his good work and he also seems to be very impressed by him. During an informal dinner once Sriram had told Rahul to never hesitate to approach him if he ever had any problem. Rahul also remembers that in his training days he had a presentation from Ethics Board, and he thought of the group to be quite effective and pertinent. But he had never heard anything from the Ethics Board beyond that point in time. It seemed as if the board was inconspicuous. Though he perceives them as an ally who can also protect him personally, but he is skeptical and afraid of what if they see them as troublemaker and align their position with Alok and rest of the team. He approached Srirams office a number of times but could not muster up the courage to go and talk to him regarding this topic. This probably is because of the Indian culture where people do not feel comfortable approaching their bosses because they feel afraid that the boss will think that the candidate is trying to undermine the teams position. Rahul recalls all his years growing up and the numerous circumstances where he witnessed cases of bribery, whether it was to traffic police after breaking a traffic rule or government official to get your work done, all these things have been so prevalent in society that it does not even look wrong to many people. Rahul had thought software industry as one of the cleaner industries, and he never thought he will be in the middle of a bribery case. Levers to use Rahul faces a tough task of convincing Project Manager Alok and the other Module Lead Sameer to not pursue with the plan of bribing the government employee. In order to reinforce his point to them, he needs to think from their point of view, i.e. from a Result perspective. He also needs to have strong arguments to counter Aloks logic and those arguments will work better if he can show them through results as the consequences of this unethical action. For example, if

Alok talks about alternative ways to ensure getting the project, he has to either suggest some idea which will give them result or the other way to intimidate them by the possibility of them getting caught. On the other hand, he needs to utilize his contact with the Group Manager well by putting his point of view in front him. He should also make Sriram understand how it can affect his reputation. But before approaching Sriram, Rahul should have all his research done on the results of getting and not getting the contract and also results of harm the bribery case can cause if it leaks. Since this is definitely a violation of ethical code of conduct of the company, Rahul should approach the Ethics board with his situation. He must talk to them how important it is for the companys value and its brand reputation to not to indulge in any sort of unethical practices. He should talk to the members of the Ethics Board one on one so that he can convince some of them, if not all.

Reasons and Rationalization

Clearly evident from the case, Rahul is a character perspective person with strong emphasis on values and ethics. He is a person committed to sincerity and strong moral and personal values. It is evident from his actions and demeanor, his key character values like honesty; wisdom and integrity emulate the core key values for a person with Character perspective. However, Alok, the project manager would be a person who is primarily of Results perspective. He strongly believes in measurable results, getting the job done and protecting group interests which he believes is to work on a funded project and avoid being fired by the company for lack of work. His key values are goals and consequences. He is insecure of the

consequences of not finding a project for the team in a timely fashion which might be detrimental, and thus wants to win the bid on this project at any cost. Alok, being a results perspective person tries to rationalize his decision to go for unethical practice of paying bribe to the government official by saying that it is a common practice in the industry. But Rahul says that this is against the law and portrays his character perspective by showing clear intent of using legal and ethical practices to win the bid. Aloks other statements to rationalize his acts were that he is just utilizing the resources and even said that it is the benefit that they get from knowing the government official and defends his action by saying that the person is ready to help and we should capitalize on that. However, Rahul defends his ideas by arguing that they should not take unfair advantage of the resources and puts forward that this help by government official is not what networking is meant to achieve. Networking is intended to grow your business in a right and legal way. After the exchange of reasons and rationalizations between two conflicting personalities, the conversation got heated since neither of them were succumbing to the ideas of the other and willing to concede. This triggered Alok to challenge Rahul by asking him to furnish him with an alternative to secure this project and help avoiding the team to get dissolved or fired. He tries to persuade Rahul by saying that the survival of the team is contingent on this project and Rahul counters both the arguments by stating that hard, sincere work is the best bet to get this project. By making the best and competitive bid, he believes they could ensure the project allocation. For the survival of the team rationalization, he counters it by saying that compromising teams values for the sake of getting project is not the right solution in this case and says that the team would not like to compromise their personal values. The reasons and rationalizations of both Rahul and Alok are shown in Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1

Powerful and Persuasive Response

The most powerful and persuasive response would be to first look toward solving the matter internally within the company so that it prevents the negative publicity for the organization which could potentially dent the image of the company and impact its brand stature. As suggested before, Rahul does have two stakeholders as potential allies in the form of the ethics board and the group project manager and both of them could be approached with rationale, logic and legal consequences of indulging in bribery. Other tactics may include looking for past examples of punishment from similar instances in the past that could have taken place within the

company or in the industry through researching or taking advice from trusted colleagues and insiders in the company. Another suggestion could be doing a comparative study of other companies that faced similar ethical dilemmas within the software industry where in their best practices could be applied or improvised as a yardstick or a counter measure in dealing with the current situation. Since Rahul has a character mindset which makes him inherently passionate about his cause, this would be an important quality that could be harnessed and his efforts can be channelized to generate maximum impact and achieve the desired results. His motivation should be the first tool that has to be capitalized upon to enforce such counter strategies to prevent bribes. The ethics board is constituted in the company to protect and prevent such malicious dealings and to safeguard and enforce the highest ethical standards highlighted by the core values and mission statements of the company during its formation. The ethics board should be then notified and further guidance should be sought in order to address the issue in this forum by voicing our concern with sufficient case based material. Another measure could also be to approach and present the case to the Group Project Manager using referent power i.e. through a trusted colleague who has a friendly relationship with the Group Project Manager through a one on one appointment highlighting the consequences of such an illegal act of bribery. We can clearly make him understand the possible short term and the long term consequences of encouraging unethical behavior within the company resulting in more corruption, dilution of values, ethics, and eventually disrupt the moral fabric and operational pillars of the company leading to a complete collapse of the very foundation on which it was built. In case the first two steps as described above fail, the other alternatives could also include approaching the media through an influential friend or through trusted network of relationships

and blow the lid on the act of corruption in the company and in the government. Though this option might be deemed as a powerful and persuasive response it is difficult to envision Rahul as a lynch pin that spearheads such campaigns.

Case B
After all the contemplation and the debates in his mind, Rahul eventually succumbed to the pressure, and did not do anything about the blatant violation of ethical standards that was exhibited in this case. His insecurity with the job situation, the fact that he was the only bread earner in the family, further reinforced his stance. Samir got the lowest bid from the clerk and the team was able to secure the project allocation. But this rendered Rahul guilt ridden for the next few months and it was a detriment on his personal as well as professional life. He tried to rationalize the situation by thinking that it was not such a bad thing, as no evident harm was done, and who knows, they might have landed themselves with the project anyways with a competitive bid. But however hard he tried, he could not shrug away the guilt and he eventually submitted his resignation to Alok eight months after the incident and joined another company.

Appendix
Exhibit 2: Stakeholders

Exhibit 3: Stakeholder Mapping

Exhibit 4: How to tackle Opponents