Siemens Case
Case 1
1. According to the Webster Dictionary Bribing is money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust. In nowadays people use bribe in their daily lives for a lot of things that they dont realize, for example you finish my homework and Ill take you to lunch; that is just a small way of bribing. In a lot of countries, for you to be able to get something done faster you need to throw some extra money in or some type of a gift. Then we ask is that illegal or just a cost of doing business? I believe that bribing is unethical, not only on the person doing the bribe but also for the person receiving the bribe. There is a famous saying that says “it takes two to tango”. In the Siemens case, the bribery was in all of their doings. I believe that it wasnt necessary to use bribe to win over the contracts.
What companies need to do to win over contracts is to actually sell their products, believing that its going to benefit the country and show the countries how. Maybe instead for giving millions of dollars in bribe money actually give them a big discount.
2. The board had their reasons to not extend Kleinfelds term, despite his good performance and was not being directly implicated in the bribery scandal. From the beginning he was not received well by the conservative old generation because of his American style of work.
So I believe that the board was not right in not extending Kleinfelds term, because their reasons to do so had nothing to do with the bribery scandal, but personal. The main challenge for the new CEO was to bring the company out the bribery scandals and sustain the growth set by Kleinfeld and above all gain the confidence of labor and management within Siemens.
Siemens was really at fault in this bribery case. On account of increasing competition companies were resorting