“The CEO Who Saved a Life and Lost His Job”
Project Tasks
Please write an 8-10 pages’ long essay analyzing and discussing the following topics following the order of Tasks 1 to 6:

1. Task 1 (5 points): Summarize the case. Length suggestion: 1 page.
2. Task 2 (15 points): Identify (list) the ethical issues that have arisen in this case. Please
offer some details about each ethical issues (e.g. including what’s occurred, who’s
affected, etc.). Length suggestion: 1 page.
3. Task 3 (20 points): Identify (list) all of the stakeholders of the company (i.e., Chimerix)
in the case, and discuss each of their viewpoints (e.g., needs, desires, concerns, costs,
benefits, power, etc.). Length suggestion: 1-2 pages.
4. Task 4 (20 points): Explain in detail which of the stakeholders should be involved and
helpful to solve the ethical issues that have arisen in the case, and why, given their
viewpoints. Length suggestion: 1-2 pages.
5. Task 5 (20 points): List all of the ethical theories and principles (i.e., 14 ethical
principles under the part “Principles of ethical conduct” from Page 241 in Chapter 8 of the textbook) that are appropriate for solving the ethical issues in this case. Explain in detail why each principle is appropriate for solving the particular ethical issue. Length suggestion: 2 pages.
6. Task 6 (20 points): Using certain ethical theories and principles to recommend a plan of action for the company that will help the company (i.e., Chimerix) remain competitive and avoid such problems in the future. Explain the expected positive and negative consequences of the plan of action you recommend. Length suggestion: 2 pages.

7. You will be given 5 bonus points for sending your draft to writing center to improve your writing quality.  writing center tutoring service is free but reservation is needed. URL: Writing Center website
Guidelines and Requirement
1. The length of your essay is about 8-10 pages (double-spaced, 12 pt “Times New Roman” font, 1-inch margins, excluding exhibits and references) in MS Word format.

2. Submission deadlines:

a. You need to submit your complete draft by March 17, 2019.
b. Final submission due: April 28, 2019 11:59 PM through TurnItIn submission. Please submit your final paper a few days before the deadline so that you can

have time to revise if the similarity rate is high. You can have multiple

submissions but only your last attempt will be graded.
3. Before you start, read the instructions and the case twice. You should also read the

other files in the project one folder (on Blackboard) too.
4. You should not conduct outside research for the case analysis. In other words, you
should pretend that you are facing exactly the same situation and information
presented in the case.
5. Your answer should be specific to the six tasks specified above and follow the order to

organize your analysis. Please keep in mind that those topics are actually interconnected. You need to integrate your answers into a report with smooth logic and internal consistency. You are suggested to use appropriate sub-titles to make your paper easier to follow.

6. The analysis must be professionally written. Don’t use bullet or lists. Write your answers in complete sentences. Please conduct spelling check, grammar check, and virus-check before submission.

7. Avoid laundry lists. Focus and organize your analysis. Look for frameworks from the readings or the textbook that help you organize and present your analysis.
8. Consider ‘turning the question’ into the beginning of your answer. That is, if the question is, “What are the key issues?” begin your answer with; “The key issues” (include or are). This may seem simplistic, but is a very effective way to help you focus your answer on the question(s) asked and to earn full credit. Don’t repeat the entire question in your answer.

You need to highlight the names of the ethical principles in your paper.
Please follow APA format for your writing (URL: APA Format website ). Indicate any

references you cited in your report. The references list does NOT count for length

requirement purpose.
11. Not following instructions would result in point deduction.
Grading Standards and Rubrics
In grading your written assignments I use the following standards.

1. Rigor of analysis: You should use the appropriate frameworks from the class that are germane to the problem.
2. Logical consistency: Your writing should be logically consistent from the beginning to the end.
3. Depth of analysis and practical implications: Before making your own argument, consider alternative explanations and solutions. Then try to justify your argument or identify the situations under which some solutions are working better than others.
4. Clarity of writing: Papers should be addressed to a managerial audience. This means that you should outline carefully, write clearly and concisely, and use appropriate tables and graphics to support your argument, if necessary.
Please see attached page for the rubrics used in our course assessment.
Academic Honesty
1. The University’s policies related to academic honesty will be strictly enforced.
2. Your work on this assignment must be entirely your own. Your final submission is

subject to the similarity check by (with the submission link available in the project folder later). A submission with 20% or higher similarity rate will receive a failing score.

3. Situations in which 2 or more students are alleged to have been involved in a conspiracy to cheat will be referred to the Provost and/or Academic Council as discussed in the Student Handbook.

4. By completing and submitting this assignment, you acknowledge that you have read, and have agreed to, the above rules relating to Academic Honesty.

Summary Example:
This case discusses poor ethical reasoning and decision making by managers at B.F. Goodrich after brakes it designed failed 1968 test flights. In 1969, a former B.F. Goodrich employee, Kermit Vandivier, accused B.F. Goodrich of falsifying test reports in an attempt to quickly secure an Air Force contract rather than accurately report the brake failures and redesigning the brakes. If he had not decided to become a whistle blower, prompting calls for a government investigation, B.F. Goodrich’s ethical misconduct could have endangered many lives. This case also discusses the company’s corporate culture which prompted the managers to engage in unethical actions.
This is a good summary (or identification of the ethical dilemma) because:
1. It answers the questions: Who? What? Where? When? Why? as shown below.
2. It is concise (101 words, including 4 “B.F”s). It summarizes the key points without
repeating the case (101, not 1001 words).
3. It uses correct business and ethics terminology such as ethical reasoning, whistle

blowing, and corporate culture.
4. It is fact-filled and avoids extraneous information such as:

“I feel they should have learned to tell the truth when they were children”.
Your feelings and what the managers learned, or did not learn, as children are not
relevant facts in the case. It’s not a case in child development.

This case discusses poor ethical reasoning and decision making by managers at B.F. Goodrich after brakes it designed failed 1968 test flights. In 1969, a former B.F. Goodrich employee, Kermit Vandivier, accused B.F. Goodrich of falsifying test reports in an attempt to quickly secure an Air Force contract rather than accurately report the brake failures and redesigning the brakes. If he had not decided to become a whistle blower, prompting calls for a government investigation, B.F. Goodrich’s ethical misconduct could have endangered many lives. This case also discusses the company’s corporate culture which prompted the managers to engage in unethical actions.

Who (did what)?
What (exactly didthey do)?
Where? When?
Managers at B.F. Goodrich engaged in poor ethical reasoning and poor ethical decision making.
The managers falsified test flight data about B.F. Goodrich brakes (i.e. lied). Falsifying data put lives at risk.
Corporate offices.
Mr. Vandivier blew the whistle in 1969. B.F. Goodrich falsified reports following 1968 tests.
Why? B.F. Goodrich managers wanted to quickly secure a government contract.
Example 1: Needless verbosity, or 1001 words to say little or nothing.

Conscience is the awareness of a moral or ethical aspect to a person’s conduct with the urge to prefer right over wrong. Everyone has a conscience. We have free-will. Knowing what is right and what is wrong, however, is determined by our conscience. In our world today we have seen many individuals making the wrong decisions and this is due to not listening to their conscience. Looking at consciences from a business perspective we can look at history and see that there have been many business men and women who have ignored their consciences and in return they have had to face the consequences.
Goodrich Co. is a prime example of employees in the corporate world not listening to their. Magazines were claiming that Goodrich was a major American Corporation and in fact they were. Goodrich had plants operating in many states across the United States and even in foreign countries, but, we will look into depth at a not so impressive one story building in Troy, Ohio……..
Example 2: Repeat the case verbosity, or the answers must be in there somewhere
Today, B. F. Goodrich Co. is what we like to call “a great American company.” It has operations in the United States and Canada, Brazil, and Europe. However, in 1967 the company faced an ethical challenge as they positioned their bottom line before the safety of U.S. soldiers. In 1967, LTV Aerospace Corporation requested bids on wheels and brakes. Goodrich lost LTV’s purchases previously for near a decade and now submitted a bid that was doing the job at a near loss so LTV could not turn it down. Goodrich previously lost LTV’s business due to a flawed brake, so they anticipated providing LTV with a four disk brake weighing only 106 pounds, which was the lightest probable weight. Although bidding at a loss to constitute for their past fault is an example of good business ethics, they did expect to profit eventually. This would mean Goodrich would have any future business for replacement parts on the brakes for this aircraft and in turn, create a better bottom line for the company. John Warren, a graduate of Purdue was named project engineer for the A7D, and he, assigned Searle Lawson to produce the final production design………..
Example 3: Repeat the textbook verbosity, or show the professor I read the textbook while writing 1001 words.
Business ethics is defined as the study of good and evil, right and wrong, and in the case of business, just and unjust actions. To be ethical in business means to adhere to certain ethical customs, such as supporting truth telling, honesty, protection of life, respect for rights, fairness, and obedience to law (Steiner 189). Ethics plays a part in all aspects of life, be it in everyday social life, be it in volunteer organizations, or be it in business life. Society has progressed as a whole to encompass ethics in all aspects of life. The case of B.F. Goodrich Co. shows the ethical dilemma between employees and management over the deliberate alteration of experiment data…
Although there are different standards (e.g. APA, Chicago, etc.), in general, to cite a book, please use “(Author or authors, year published)”. Underline the book title if you want to cite the name of book in text. For a quotation, please use “(Author or authors, year published: p. XXX)”.

Example 4: Off-track verbosity or I don’t know so I’ll write about something else.
When thinking of business ethics, most people would associate the meaning of business ethics with the ethic in terms of understanding the difference between wrong and right. But in reality without looking in a dictionary for these two words, can mean something totally different depending on the person. And what I mean about that is that even though business ethics and ethics are presumed similar by definition with the only difference being that one surrounds business in general one cannot presume that there the same. Ethics deals more with a single persons feeling or thoughts on a particular issue while Business ethics deals with a number of individuals that share different feels, opinions and thoughts that revolve around what’s best for the business of company’s regardless sometimes of whether it’s wrong or right. And this case is a prime example of the differences between ethics and business ethics…
Example 5: Generality and verbosity number 1, or sort of discuss the sort of general problems, kind of, like.
Ethics in business is an essential element for keeping customers as well as employees safe, both physically and legally. Sometimes it can be hard for employees to uphold ethical standards. This may be especially true for young or new employees. When the new young employee feels there is no one to turn to, or when senior management is trying to avoid the negative consequences of admitting a mistake. The chain of command at Goodrich is to blame for this huge mess brought about by one faulty brake system. Each member involved is connected to each other and as the issue is brought to each member of the corporate ladder, they fail one by one to uphold any sort ethical integrity for the company. They each seemed
to use the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. In the end some sort of justice is brought to the situation, although if justice was upheld from the beginning could Goodrich avoided all the embarrassment of having bad publicity and calls for a government investigation?…

Example 6: Taking the case too personally, or I wish I was studying psychology and feelings.
Reading about this case really bothered me. It just really got to me because sometimes bosses force you to do something that you know is wrong by threatening the thing that you need or wants. There is a way to stop this from happening but sometimes it can only hurt you even worse. That is by going over you bosses head to there superiors, but there is an order you must go in. If they refuse to listen to you and make you do something that you know is wrong…
Example 7: Making the case personal or I wish someone wrote a case about me
I believe I am an ethical person with strong morals, principles and values. As children, we are taught the difference between right and wrong. I certainly know that my parents tried to teach me the difference, and I believe that most of us are taught morals, principles and ethics. All parents want their children to grow up to be ethical adults. As college students graduate, they are excited to begin working in the field of their choice. When the college graduate realizes that the company they are working for is not ethical, they are disappointed and even discouraged to continue working there…
Example 8: Using overly strong language or injecting your personal beliefs
The main ethical issue presented in the B.F Goodrich case “Why Should My Conscience Bother Me?” is one that involves the deliberate falsification of important test data and statistical information, regardless of the cost, in order to keep a business deal. Certain B.F Goodrich employees were prepared to do whatever was necessary to cover up mistakes and avoid the blame for those mistakes. The potential damage to stakeholders as a result of these actions is undeniable. When employees at B.F. Goodrich decided to fake tests and falsify information, they were setting the company up for certain public failure. B.F. Goodrich executives made it clear at the beginning of the case that they wanted to make the best brake possible regardless of cost because they had a reputation to uphold and a business relationship to repair with LTV. When certain employees failed to act ethically, the reputation of B.F. Goodrich was certain to be compromised…

Take a marred reputation, an experienced stubborn engineer, a young, spirited engineer and we have the ingredients to a recipe for moral disaster in the making. The year is 1967 and it has produced a lifetime opportunity for B.F. Goodrich to reprieve themselves from the bottom of the pit to a more than qualified client…
How can the safety of millions be brushed aside just to pad hundreds of people’s pockets? I mean, after all, what is the price of an innocent human beings life? B.F. Goodrich was faced with this ethical dilemma in 1967. First allow me to give you a small yet meaningful history of B.F. Goodrich and this situation presented in 1967…


Stake olders are t ose affected by an organization’s operations. Alt oug definitions vary, stake olders are often designated as groups rat er t an as individuals. In ot er words, for t e sake of analysis, managers and employees are usually grouped toget er as stake older group, rat er t an focusing on a particular manager or employee, alt oug some cases will focus more on t e individuals involved. Similarly, customers or stock olders as a group are usually t e focus of analysis, rat er t an an individual customer or t e individual
stock older.
T e most important t ing to remember is t at most organizations ave similar
stake olders suc as stock olders, customers, employees, suppliers, creditors, unions, trade associations, government and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), taxpayers, communities, religious groups, t e environment, and even future generations may be legitimate stake olders. It is mostly t eir interest in t e organization and/or t eir influence on t e organization t at c anges!
In ot er words, w en you read a case, you may not always read about all of t ese
stake older groups specifically, but t at doesn’t necessarily mean t ey can be ignored in your analysis. A good stake older analysis will consider as many current, or potential future stake olders as possible. For example, NGOs may not be mentioned in a particular case, but if t e company decided to c oose a course of action or project t at could arm t e environment, NGOs w ose goal is to protect t e environment are quite likely to quickly target t e business.
Sometimes stake olders are also categorized as market or non-market depending upon w et er or not t ey ave direct business dealings wit t e organization, or as primary or secondary stake olders. T ese categorizations can be useful at times, but may also interfere wit a good analysis if one assumes, often incorrectly, t at nonmarket or secondary are synonymous wit unimportant. T ey are not synonymous and suc assumptions about stake olders s ould be avoided.
T e first goal of a good stake older analysis is to identify t e stake olders w o ave, or are likely to ave, a stake in an organization’s operations. T at is, t ey are, or t ey are likely to be affected, by an organization’s operations now or in t e future.
T e next step in a good stake older analysis is to determine t e interests of eac
stake older, or w at t ey want and/or expect from t e organization. Also, t e analysis
s ould consider w en and if t e interests of different stake olders may converge or diverge. T is often leads to a greater understanding of w ic stake older groups mig t
c oose to join toget er to exert influence over t e organization t roug coalitions or ot er efforts, or to a greater understanding of w ic stake older groups mig t become active, if t ey ave been inactive.
T e next step in a good stake older analysis is to identify t e level of influence or t e power of eac stake older group. Some groups may ave economic power, ot ers groups mig t ave legal power, w ile groups suc as NGOs often ave t e power of moral suasion backed up by activists w o can boycott or take ot er actions against an organization.
In conclusion, at a minimum, a good stake older analysis seeks to identify w o are t e most important stake olders, w at are t eir interests, w at is t ere ability to influence t e organization, and w at stake olders mig t form alliances or coalitions, and if so, under
w at circumstances. T e ultimate goal in a good stake older analysis is to elp an organization better understand its stake olders so t at it can develop better strategies t at will more likely be supported by its stake olders.
T is is only a summary of stake older analysis, please be sure to read t e textbook for more information on stake older groups and stake older analysis. In future classes, you mig t also learn more about various ways to create ‘maps’ to better analyze stake older groups, interests, and powers.

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more