Walmart and Apple Research Paper Evaluation of Your Organization’s Commitment to People and the Environment – Walmart Purpose: For this option, you will

Walmart and Apple Research Paper Evaluation of Your Organization’s Commitment to People and the Environment – Walmart

Purpose: For this option, you will be required to gather first-hand knowledge in order to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of discretionary activities taken by your firm as they relate to the domain of “corporate social and environmental responsibility.” You are encouraged to become familiar with both the people and the programs directly focused on this task through interviews and reviews of available documents. It will be useful to initially trace the history, scope and development of these commitments as they relate to your organization, its stakeholders, and the specific industry in which it operates. Through your interviews and research, you should carefully delineate any gaps you find between stated purposes and actual accomplishments, as well as potential ways to improve performance. Finally, you are asked to think creatively about your firm’s corporate social and environmental responsibility platform, and to suggest novel ways in which it could be realistically and successfully enhanced.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Walmart and Apple Research Paper Evaluation of Your Organization’s Commitment to People and the Environment – Walmart Purpose: For this option, you will
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Note: This option must include a one-page addendum that will serve as an appendix.

Appendix For Option 2 – Apple Computers
Pick one firm from the list (and links) below. Become familiar with that firm’s publicly available descriptions and reports about its Corporate Social Responsibility activities. Do you think these programs present solid and credible information on how the firm serves the best interests of people and the environment? Where do you see unique strengths or identifiable weaknesses?

This analysis can be utilized as another basis of comparison as you evaluate your own organization’s commitment to corporate responsibility.

Apple –

Format of research paper

Firm and Industry Characteristics and History Relevant to Ethical Issues
Formal Ethical and Legal Compliance Structures and Processes
Current Ethical Climate
Interviewee Perspectives


Please use the below chapters for concept and knowledge. CHAPTER 6
Chapter 5 presented ethics as organizational culture, but it may have raised as many questions as
it answered, such as “What are real organizations doing to create and communicate an ethical
organizational culture?” This chapter is designed to help answer that question by focusing more
narrowly on ethics and legal compliance programs in several large American corporations. These
programs are designed to manage and communicate ethics in a variety of ways.
Whatever your organizational level, you should find the information in this chapter helpful. If
you’re at a high level, it should give you ideas about how to manage ethics and legal compliance
in your firm. If you’re at a lower or middle management level, it should help you understand your
own organization’s approach to ethics management and how it compares to what other
organizations are currently doing. If you’re a student, it will help you think about what to look for
during the job search.
In preparing this chapter, we spoke with executives from four companies in a variety of
industries: Lockheed Martin Corporation (global security); United Technologies Corporation
(UTC—Otis elevators, Carrier air conditioners, Pratt & Whitney jet engines, Sikorsky
helicopters); Merck (medicines, vaccines, and consumer care and animal health products); and
Adelphia (telecommunications/cable). We are grateful to these executives for their time and
contributions to this book. These companies vary in size. UTC has over 220,000 employees
(more than half outside the United States) and a presence in more than 180 countries. Merck has
80,000 employees in 140 countries. Adelphia had 14,000 employees across the United States
when its assets were purchased in 2005 by Comcast and Time Warner. Lockheed Martin has
118,000 employees and operates in 572 locations across 46 states in the U.S. and internationally
in 75 nations and territories.
Think about the challenge of managing ethics and legal compliance in these firms, many with
employees at locations around the globe. All of the companies are engaged in a variety of efforts,
but their approaches differ somewhat due to differences in industries and organizational cultures.
For example, some industries (e.g., defense and chemicals) are more highly regulated than
others, so compliance with laws and regulations is an important goal, and it must be managed.
For many of these companies, ethics and legal compliance are closely tied to maintenance of the
firm’s reputation and brand value. In such an environment, integrity becomes a key driver of
corporate action.
Many businesses are allocating significant resources to formal ethics and legal compliance
programs. The increasing attention to formal ethics management programs has come about
partially because of media attention to scandals in American business and management’s
awareness of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (see more about the guidelines at the end of this
chapter); because for a number of years, organizations such as the Conference Board have held
business ethics conferences at which formal ethics management systems are encouraged; and
because some corporate leaders are simply committed to the importance of ethics in their
Perhaps nothing, however, has influenced corporate ethics programs in the United States more
than the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which took effect in the early 1990s. Until the mid-1980s,
criminal law focused on the individual defendant rather than the corporation, and fines on
corporations were relatively modest. In 1984, Congress created the U.S. Sentencing Commission
in response to criticism of judicial discretion in sentencing and perceived disparities between
sentences for “white-collar” and other types of crimes. In 1987, the Commission imposed federal
sentencing guidelines for individual offenders, and as a result the trend has been toward
increasing fines for both individuals and organizations convicted of felony crimes. The
guidelines limited judicial sentencing discretion and mandated some incarceration for virtually
every felony offender.
In 1991, the Commission issued new sentencing guidelines for organizations convicted of federal
crimes. The organization can be convicted even if only one employee is caught breaking the law.
The guidelines cover most federal crimes, including fraud, antitrust, securities, tax, bribery, and
money-laundering offenses, and they impose a schedule of mandatory fines. “Virtually without
exception, the Guidelines require a convicted organization to make restitution and to pay a
substantial fine (which is not tax deductible).”2 The guidelines even include a provision calling
for a “corporate death penalty.” The provision was used by federal prosecutors in the case of
American Precision Components Inc., a Farmingdale, New York, company that sold ordinary
nuts and bolts to government contractors as highly tested space components.3 The company
agreed to divest all of its assets. Arthur Andersen, the former auditing firm that once “stood for
integrity,” put its stamp of approval on a long list of dirty books (e.g., Sunbeam, Waste
Management, Enron, Global Crossing, Qwest, and WorldCom) and has now become the biggest
case ever of corporate capital punishment.4
The sentencing guidelines were designed to use a “carrot and stick” approach to managing
corporate crime. The carrot provides incentives to organizations to develop a strong internal
control system to detect and manage illegal behavior. The guidelines list seven requirements
(outlined in detail in Table 6.1) for due diligence and an effective compliance program. For
example, the guidelines propose that organizations establish and communicate compliance
standards and set up communication, monitoring, reporting, and accountability systems. In this
approach, the stick provides for severe punishment for organizations that are convicted of crimes
and were not proactively managing legal compliance within the organization. Fines and other
sanctions vary widely depending on prior violations, whether management reports itself and
cooperates with investigative authorities, and whether the company has an effective program in
place to prevent and detect illegal behavior. The 1991 guidelines listed the following seven
specific requirements for an effective legal compliance program.
Therefore, the same crime can be subject to a wide range of penalties. The minimum fine under
the guidelines is $250, and the maximum is $290 million or even more if the crime meets certain
criteria. (For more specific information about how fines are determined, see the appendix, “How
Fines Are Determined under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines” at the end of this chapter.) The
guidelines also recommend that a defendant organization that does not have an effective legal
compliance program should be put on corporate probation. Some of the recommended conditions
of probation include requiring that the organization publicize (at its own expense and as directed
by the court) the fact of its conviction and the nature of the punishment; periodically report to the
court regarding its financial condition and operating results; submit to periodic, unannounced
reviews of books and records, and interrogation of employees by court-appointed experts (paid
by the organization); and inform the court of any material adverse change in business conditions
or prospects.
Table 6.1 Seven Requirements for Due Diligence and an Effective Compliance Program*
According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s reports (found at, more and
more firms are being sentenced under the guidelines. Because the guidelines were not applied
retroactively, they remained under the radar for a number of years. However, their impact has
steadily increased and companies are paying attention. For example, in 1995, Con Edison was
convicted of an environmental offense and was subject to probation that included onerous
compliance requirements. In 1996, in what has come to be known as the Caremark decision,
corporate boards of directors were put on notice to take the guidelines into account as part of
their corporate governance responsibilities or face personal liability. In 1999, Hoffman-LaRoche
was convicted of antitrust conspiracy charges and was fined $500 million, the largest criminal
fine imposed to that point in the United States, and Rhone Poulenc was granted amnesty because
it reported the offense. In 2001, TAP Pharmaceuticals received the third largest fine ever
imposed to that date under the guidelines—$290 million.5 (See Chapter 5 for a case study about
TAP Pharmaceuticals.) In recent years, fines have climbed astronomically. AT&T paid almost
$1 billion in fines in 2011 for improperly charging taxes to customers who use AT&T lines to
access the Internet. Intel paid $1.25 billion in 2010 for redesigning its chips to retaliate against
computer makers who used a rival’s chips. In 2009, Pfizer was fined $2.3 billion for illegally
marketing a painkiller, and finally, the big banks (Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan
Chase, Citigroup, Ally) paid $25 billion in fines in 2012 over faulty foreclosures and
mishandling customer requests for mortgage modifications.6
In 2004, the U.S. Sentencing Commission released revisions to the guidelines, including the
expectation that the board of directors will oversee the compliance and ethics program, that
senior management will ensure its effectiveness, and that the compliance officer will have
adequate authority and access to senior management. In addition, organizations must train
employees and conduct risk assessments to identify potential areas of concern. The revision also
ensures that organizations cannot just “check off” the list of guidelines (for example, with a code
of conduct that just sits on the shelf). Rather, the program in place must be seen as an integral
part of the organization’s culture (see Chapter 5 for more on ethical culture). With the Supreme
Court’s 2005 United States v. Booker decision, judges are no longer required to follow the
guidelines strictly. The guidelines remain advisory, and federal prosecutors have been told they
are expected to take steps to ensure adherence to them. Therefore, most observers now expect
that the guidelines will continue to be followed in most cases.7
In recent years, the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines continued to evolve with refinements being
announced on an almost annual basis, and that is a good thing. Instead of being a dead document,
the guidelines are very much alive and the commission regularly revises them to try to reward
good corporate citizenship. As you’ll see in the material that follows, most of the elements of the
Sentencing Guidelines have become integral parts of organizational ethics programs throughout
the United States. While most companies make a real effort to meet the “letter” of the guidelines,
others go much further to incorporate the “spirit” of the guidelines. We discuss some of those
efforts in this chapter.
Making Ethics Comprehensive and Holistic
The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines very clearly aim to encourage organizations to create ethics
programs that drive integrity and ethical behavior in their business operations. As the guidelines
have become more refined and sophisticated over time, responsible organizations have found
numerous ways of making ethics and values central to how they do business. As we read in the
last chapter, values such as ethics and integrity become part of an organization’s culture by
aligning various elements throughout the organization. Integrating any corporate value into the
organizational culture starts with strong executive commitment. Once executives are clearly
behind the effort, then the effort must be communicated to every employee and compliance must
be measured and rewarded for the value to become part of the culture.
Managing Ethics: The Corporate Ethics Office
Some organizations delegate ethics management responsibilities widely, finding that a strong
statement of values and a strong ethical culture can keep the ethics management effort together.
This approach may be particularly effective in smaller firms. However, most large firms find that
ethics initiatives need to be coordinated from a single office to ensure that all of the program’s
pieces fit together and that all of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines’ requirements are being met.
The corporate ethics office concept can be traced to 1985 and General Dynamics, then the
second-largest U.S. defense contractor. The secretary of the Navy, out of concern about the
appropriateness of certain indirect expenses that had been billed to the government, directed
General Dynamics to establish and enforce a rigorous code of ethics for all employees that
included sanctions for violators. The company turned to a nonprofit consulting firm in
Washington, D.C., the Ethics Resource Center, for help in developing the code. As part of this
process, an ethics office was also set up and an ethics officer was hired.8 In 1986, General
Dynamics joined with other defense industry companies in the Defense Industry Initiative (see to “embrace and promote ethical business conduct.” The companies shared best
practices, and these best practices provided much of the foundation for the U.S. Sentencing
Commission requirements.
The 1991 U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines gave impetus to the move toward establishing
formal ethics programs in firms outside the defense industry. The guidelines also called for the
assignment of specific high-level individuals with responsibility to oversee legal compliance
standards. This requirement led to the development of a brand new role—that of the corporate
ethics officer.
Ethics and Compliance Officers
Until the mid-1980s, the title “ethics and compliance officer” didn’t exist in American business.
Today, with a growing number of ethics and compliance practitioners worldwide, these highlevel executives have their own professional organization, the Ethics and Compliance Officer
Association (ECOA—see The association’s stated mission is “to promote
ethical business practices, serving as a forum for the exchange of information and strategies.”
The organization began in 1991 when over 40 ethics and compliance officers met at the Center
for Business Ethics at Bentley University in Waltham, Massachusetts. The organization was
officially launched later that year and began holding annual meetings in 1993. As of 2009, the
ECOA has more than 1,300 members representing more than half of the Fortune 100 companies,
nonprofits, municipalities, and international members from over 30 countries. The organization
holds regular conferences, workshops, and webcasts and provides a variety of classroom and
distance learning opportunities for ethics and compliance officers and their staff.
The demand for qualified and knowledgeable compliance and ethics professionals is so high that
more organizations are being created to help them share information and design more effective
ethics and compliance programs. One of these is the Society for Corporate Compliance and
Ethics (SCCE), a nonprofit started in 2002 and headquartered in Minneapolis. The SCCE boasts
more than 3,000 members and has a robust web presence (
Many firms designate their legal counsel as the ethics officer. Others create a title such as vice
president or director of ethics, compliance, or business practices, director of internal audit, ethics
program coordinator, or just plain ethics officer. Most firms locate the ethics officer at the
corporate level, and these high-level executives generally report to a senior executive, the CEO,
the board of directors, the audit committee of the board, or some combination. These individuals
are expected to provide leadership and strategies for ensuring that the firm’s standards of
business conduct are communicated and upheld throughout the organization.
INSIDERS VERSUS OUTSIDERS An ethics or compliance officer may be an insider or
someone brought in from the outside. We talked to past and present ethics officers who represent
both categories. It can sometimes be more difficult for an outsider to achieve credibility in the
ethics or compliance role, but someone brought in from outside the company has the advantage
of being able to evaluate the situation with a fresh eye. If change is needed, that person may be
better able to guide the organization through the change process. Most of the ethics officers we
interviewed believe that, if available, a respected and trusted insider who knows the company’s
culture and people is usually the best choice. Results of a 1995 survey support the insider
preference; 82 percent of the firms responding to the question hired their ethics officer from
inside the firm.9 The very best situation may be when the ethics officer is also a part of the senior
management team or being groomed for an executive position. However, outsiders are often
brought in if the organization is responding to an ethical crisis of some kind.
At Lockheed Martin, ethics is taken so seriously that an assignment managing an ethics office is
part of the grooming process for executive positions that high-potential employees receive.
Lockheed Martin has a vice president of ethics and sustainability for the entire corporation and
five ethics directors—one for each of Lockheed Martin’s five huge business areas. These
positions report to the executive vice presidents in the business areas and are largely rotational.
High-potential executives are recruited into these jobs as a development experience; they serve
for two to three years and then go back to the businesses. Other high-potential employees replace
them as ethics directors, and the process continues. This is a novel approach to enhancing an
ethics program and grooming executives, and it should go a long way toward truly integrating
ethics and integrity into the business rhythm.
Lockheed Martin will soon have a full cadre of executive-level employees who have served the
company as ethics professionals. One employee involved in this process is Craig Cash, who is
currently (2013) the director of ethics and business conduct for Lockheed Martin Mission
Systems and Training (MST) in Washington, DC. Cash holds an undergraduate degree in
engineering and a Masters in Leadership and Business Ethics from Duquesne University. Cash
was working in engineering when he was tapped for the ethics officer job in Syracuse in 2003.
Now he is the Director for MST and is managing investigations, overseeing ethics and
compliance training, tracking metrics through surveys and other studies, and looking for trends
in this area. He is also talking to leaders, working with them to integrate ethics and compliance
into the business by creating a “culture of trust” throughout the organization. With his unique
background and advanced education in the field, Cash is the sole exception among business area
ethics directors and is nonrotational. According to Cash, working in the Ethics Office at
Lockheed Martin is a joy since the business takes the topic so seriously and supports its
employees 100 percent in doing the right thing.
ETHICS OFFICER BACKGROUND The job of ethics officer has been called “the newest
profession in American business.”10 Individuals holding this position come from many
backgrounds. With insiders, the job is often assigned to someone in a staff function (e.g.,
someone in the corporate secretary’s office, office of the legal counsel, audit, or human
resources). According to past ethics officer surveys, law was the most common background. That
is true of most of our interviewees as well. Interestingly, some people believe that lawyers
shouldn’t be considered for the job, be…
Purchase answer to see full

Homework Market Pro
Calculate your paper price
Pages (550 words)
Approximate price: -

Our Unique Features

Custom Papers Means Custom Papers

This is what custom writing means to us: Your essay starts from scratch. Plagiarism is unacceptable. We demand the originality of our academic essay writers and they only deliver authentic and original papers. 100% guaranteed! If your final version is not as expected, we will revise it immediately.

Qualified and Experienced Essay Writers

Our team consists of carefully selected writers with in-depth expertise. Each writer in our team is selected based on their writing skills and experience. Each team member is able to provide plagiarism-free, authentic and high-quality content within a short turnaround time.

Free Unlimited Revisions

If you think we missed something, send your order for a free revision. You have 10 days to submit the order for review after you have received the final document. You can do this yourself after logging into your personal account or by contacting our support.

Prompt Delivery and 100% Assuarance

We understand you. Spending your hard earned money on a writing service is a big deal. It is a big investment and it is difficult to make the decision. That is why we support our claims with guarantees. We want you to be reassured as soon as you place your order. Here are our guarantees: Your deadlines are important to us. When ordering, please note that delivery will take place no later than the expiry date.

100% Originality & Confidentiality

Every paper we write for every order is 100% original. To support this, we would be happy to provide you with a plagiarism analysis report on request.We use several writing tools checks to ensure that all documents you receive are free from plagiarism. Our editors carefully review all quotations in the text. We also promise maximum confidentiality in all of our services.

24/7 Customer Support

We help students, business professionals and job seekers around the world in multiple time zones. We also understand that students often keep crazy schedules. No problem. We are there for you around the clock. If you need help at any time, please contact us. An agent is always available for you.

Try it now!

Calculate the price of your order

Total price:

How it works?

Follow these simple steps to get your paper done

Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.

Our Services

Our services are second to none. Every time you place an order, you get a personal and original paper of the highest quality.


Essay Writing Service

While a college paper is the most common order we receive, we want you to understand that we have college writers for virtually everything, including: High school and college essays Papers, book reviews, case studies, lab reports, tests All graduate level projects, including theses and dissertations Admissions and scholarship essays Resumes and CV’s Web content, copywriting, blogs, articles Business writing – reports, marketing material, white papers Research and data collection/analysis of any type.


Any Kind of Essay Writing!

Whether you are a high school student struggling with writing five-paragraph essays, an undergraduate management student stressing over a research paper, or a graduate student in the middle of a thesis or dissertation, has a writer for you. We can also provide admissions or scholarship essays, a resume or CV, as well as web content or articles. Writing an essay for college admission takes a certain kind of writer. They have to be knowledgeable about your subject and be able to grasp the purpose of the essay.


Quality Check and Editing Support

Every paper is subject to a strict editorial and revision process. This is to ensure that your document is complete and accurate and that all of your instructions have been followed carefully including creating reference lists in the formats APA, Harvard, MLA, Chicago / Turabian.


Prices and Discounts

We are happy to say that we offer some of the most competitive prices in this industry. Since many of our customers are students, job seekers and small entrepreneurs, we know that money is a problem. Therefore, you will find better prices with us compared to writing services of this calibre.