Ethical Issues in International Business: Case Analysis
This paper examines ethical issues arising in international business operations, focusing on a case study involving gender discrimination and workplace harassment at a multinational bank. The paper analyzes violations of fundamental moral principles when a female employee, Sara Strong, is demeaned by her supervisor during an overseas assignment in Mexico. It further discusses direct and indirect workplace discrimination and the role of HR professionals in managing cross-cultural diversity. In its second part, the paper contrasts tipping for personal benefit with bribery to secure business contracts, applying utilitarian reasoning to argue that the two practices differ morally in both intent and consequence.
- Introduction: Ethics and Overseas Assignments: HR challenges and culture shock in overseas postings
- Moral Violations in the Workplace: Leisinger's principles and Sara Strong's harassment
- Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment: Direct and indirect discrimination types in Mexico assignment
- HR Responsibility and Cross-Cultural Management: HR's consulting role and managing cultural diversity
- Tipping vs. Bribery: A Utilitarian Perspective: Contrasting tipping and bribery through utilitarian ethics
- Conclusion: Summary of ethical failures and corporate responsibility
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper applies a structured ethical framework — drawing on Leisinger's moral common sense principles — to evaluate specific workplace incidents, grounding abstract ethics in concrete case detail.
- It maintains a clear distinction between two separate ethical problems (workplace gender discrimination and bribery), treating each with its own reasoning before connecting them through the broader theme of corporate responsibility.
- The utilitarian analysis in Part 2 is handled with intellectual honesty, acknowledging the weaknesses of utilitarianism while still applying it to argue a nuanced position on bribery versus tipping.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied ethical reasoning — taking a recognized normative framework (Leisinger's moral principles; utilitarian ethics) and systematically testing whether real-world actions conform to or violate those standards. This technique shows how abstract moral theory translates into practical corporate decision-making and policy evaluation.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with context on international HR challenges, then applies a moral checklist to the case study's central incidents. It progresses through discrimination typology (direct vs. indirect), organizational hierarchy failures, and recommended corporate remedies. Part 2 shifts to a philosophical contrast between tipping and bribery, using utilitarian logic to differentiate personal-benefit acts from broader ethical compromises. References are cited throughout to support both the HR and ethical frameworks.
Introduction: Ethics and Overseas Assignments
In the present business environment, due to the international nature and global exposure of virtually every company, organizations are increasingly sending employees on overseas assignments. Because of the diversity in beliefs, traditions, cultural values, and practices found in countries other than an employee's home nation, workers can experience culture shock and difficulty coping in their host country. In some cases, prevailing attitudes toward professionals in the host nation can prove harmful to the employee to a considerable degree.
Career advancement is directly affected in such situations, and employee morale declines. The bank has a responsibility to ensure that its personnel are not harmed or limited in their career advancement by the social customs of the host nation. Certain practices of the host country may be demeaning to an employee, causing embarrassment and reducing their ability to perform at their best. As the employing organization, the bank bears a special responsibility for the professional advancement of its employees so that, based on individual merit and competence, employees are promoted to higher grades in the value chain.
As the industry moves into the stream of knowledge management — defining concepts, sharing information, and imparting industry-specific knowledge — HR professionals are dealing with a more knowledgeable and empowered workforce than ever before (Chapter by Rajesh B. Iyer).
Moral Violations in the Workplace
There is a moral common sense — a set of fundamental ethical rules — which states: (a) avoid harming others; (b) respect the rights of others; (c) do not lie or cheat; (d) keep promises and honor contracts; (e) obey the law; (f) prevent harm to others; (g) help people in need; (h) show fairness; and (i) strengthen these qualities in others (Leisinger, 1994).
The bank clearly violated several of these principles when William Vitam began presenting his female colleague Sara Strong as a showpiece, referring to her as "my cute assistant" and "our lady banker," much to her objection. Her complaints were not heeded by Vitam, who offered the explanation that he was simply acting in accordance with the customs of the host country — Mexico — where, he claimed, the competence of women is not acknowledged. Vitam defended his actions by arguing that, since it was nearly impossible to change the attitudes of the Mexican bankers, it was simply a strategic approach, and he asked Sara to go along with it in the interest of the company. He went so far as to ask Sara to abandon her professional image and try to be more "flexible" and "feminine," directly contrary to her personal wishes (case study).
The bank acted in an audacious manner and attempted to compromise the personal freedom of a female employee. Using a female colleague in a demeaning way in front of clients does not reflect good ethical practice. Similarly, dressing receptionist staff provocatively to attract more business violates basic ethical principles. Sara was quick to point out that this behavior was not consistent with the bank's own policies and was demeaning to those required to wear such uniforms.
Over time, William Vitam's patronizing conduct toward Sara increased as it appeared to yield business results. Sara's complaint to Vice President Tom Fried also failed to evoke any response, as the entire hierarchical chain was focused on exploiting Sara's presence as a showpiece to gain business advantage. This is both immoral and unethical, given that Sara consistently and clearly protested the behavior of her senior colleagues William Vitam and Tom Fried (case study).
Tipping vs. Bribery: A Utilitarian Perspective
I oppose the view that offering a tip to secure a better table at a restaurant should be regarded in the same light as offering a bribe to secure a business contract. When paying a tip for a better table, one is acting in one's own personal interest rather than affecting the greater good of others. Utilitarianism has attracted significant criticism on the grounds that it cannot be verified by science or logic as the definitively correct ethical system. Furthermore, comparing happiness or benefit across different individuals is inherently difficult, as such measures are not objectively quantifiable (Utilitarianism: Criticism of Utilitarianism).
When paying a bribe to secure a business contract, the action may on its face appear immoral. Both accepting and offering bribes are generally considered immoral activities. However, by securing the contract, one increases the profitability prospects of one's company, which in turn enables employees to be financially rewarded more adequately. Failure to secure the contract would mean the project cannot proceed, and the downstream effect would be the potential layoff of a considerable number of employees who have served the company faithfully. Such an outcome may therefore not be in the best interests of those employees.
Considering the matter from yet another angle: in environments where moral values are frequently subordinated in tendering and bidding processes, failing to secure a contract may simply mean that a competitor will offer the very same inducement to the relevant authorities. This reduces the question to a pragmatic one — in a world where financial influence is pervasive, a refusal to engage in such practices results in a competitive disadvantage. Offering a bribe in such circumstances may be seen as a practical decision that serves the collective interests of one's employees, who depend on the company for their daily livelihood.
Nevertheless, this reasoning must be weighed carefully against the long-term institutional damage that bribery causes to markets, governance, and public trust. The utilitarian calculus cannot be confined to the immediate workforce alone; broader social consequences must also be factored in.
Conclusion
The cases examined here illustrate how international business operations expose companies to complex ethical dilemmas involving both employee welfare and competitive conduct. Whether the issue is gender discrimination enabled by deference to host-country customs, or the rationalizing of bribery through utilitarian logic, organizations must establish and enforce clear ethical standards. Failure to do so not only harms individual employees such as Sara Strong but also undermines the integrity and long-term credibility of the institution itself.
References
"Chapter by Rajesh B. Iyer" (12 August 2003). Retrieved from Accessed 12 August 2005.
Leisinger, Klaus M. (2 June 1994). "Corporate Ethics & International Business: Some Basic Issues — Moral Common Sense." Retrieved from Accessed 12 August 2005.
Murphy, Robert. "Is Utilitarianism Viable?" Retrieved from http://www.mises.org/story/698. Accessed 12 August 2005.
"Utilitarianism: Criticism of Utilitarianism." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism. Accessed 12 August 2005.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.