John Brevard

M5990 Corporate Responsibility & Society

November 10, 2013


Short Written Assignment #3


To me, the best way to complete this assignment is to relate it to the Hookers conditions for
rational choice, i.e., generalization, utilitarian, and virtue test and determine whether or not Joe
Ryans actions are ethical. The generalization test requires that for any action that occurs, there
must be a reason behind it. If you look at Joes performance as CEO of Glamour-a-Go-Go, it
would seem as if he is a sound decision maker because he has demonstrated great vision and
strategic thinking and leadership. However, when it came to his perceived infidelities, Joe fails
the generalization test in the sense that just because hes the boss, doesnt mean he can have or
give off the impression that hes a ladies man, especially if hes married.
In its simplest form, the utilitarian test suggests that we have or should have some ultimate end
that might be called utility and that rationality requires us to decide what is inherently good and
aim for it consistently. When applying it to Joe, it would seem, from a work perspective, Joe
passes the utilitarian test because as CEO, his actions have been all about making the
organization successful.and he has by saving the company from bankruptcy after coming on
board in 1992 and making many employees and shareholders happy and wealthy.
The virtues test requires people to act in a way that is logically consistent with who they are in
regards to their virtues and integrity. In reading the case study, although Joe seems to be an
amicable and caring CEO with an open door policy, what fails him is his flirtatious actions,
which gives off the impression that he cheats on his wife.

2

In reading A Question of Character, the thought that constantly entered my mind was,
whatever ones perception is, is also their reality. To me, it is similar to how court of public
opinion operates today.although a person may not have done anything wrong, they are
castigated and deemed guilty until proven innocent.
Although Joe seems to be a magnificent CEO who is happily married, his dalliances with
Laura, Donna Ulin, and Kimberly Crogan give off the perception that he is cheating on his wife.
In the court of public opinion, this is damaging to Joe because all it takes is one incident with a
mistress and Glamour-Go-Go will be in damage control mode. Therefore, it does make a
difference. Companies want leaders with manifest ethics and exhibit social responsibility.
CEOs are the face of many organizations and their actions on-the-job and off can dictate success
or failure.
In regards to Suzy Wetlaufer, I refer you to Proverbs 18:21 which states, The tongue has the
power of life and death, and those who love it will eat its fruit. What is it saying? The verse
talks about speaking life (and death) into existence. Wetlaufers life seems to have imitated the
article she wrote in 1999. Working as an editor for the Harvard Business Review (HBR), Suzy
was successful, but like Joe, she consistently did things as an editor which constituted to a
conflict of interest. Dating her editorial assistant, recently divorced Ford CEO Jacques Nasser,
and Jack Welch, who she interviewed for an HBR article. Unlike Joe, Suzy and Jack were
caught by Jacks wife, Jane. Until this occurred, the HBR had no problem with Suzys dalliance
with Jack because she had made the HBR a cash cow for Harvard. Once caught and reported in
the Wall Street journal, the HBR dismissed her, albeit with a nice severance package. Although
her actions were unethical, she made out nicely by marrying Welch. She just needs to make sure
he doesnt do another interview with a woman that is attractive and younger than she is.
3