💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 5030.gmi captured on 2022-06-11 at 21:55:21. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)

➡️ Next capture (2023-01-29)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Treading a fine line: A case of corruption?

Chana R Schoenberger

Q: Our company has a contract with an overseas distributor that has recently

been sanctioned over a corruption issue with another company's products that

they also distribute. We are wary of doing business with them now, although we

have no reason to believe that there is anything improper about the way they

are selling our products. With a large outstanding order that is material to

our worldwide sales results, we don't want to dump them altogether. What can we

do?A: This is a tricky situation. You need the order to go through, or your

financials will suffer. At the same time, you don t want to be tainted, or to

appear so. This could hurt your ability to compete in the country where this

distributor was sanctioned, and in other countries, like the US, that have

strict foreign anti-bribery laws. At a minimum, the situation could create

compliance headaches for your company.

If your contract with this distributor is important to your company s results,

you can t disregard the impact of dropping it as a business partner. You have

an ethical obligation to consider your company s interests; you owe that to

your shareholders. Financial gain is not something that can be quickly

dismissed, especially since it plays an important part in a company's financial

health and, ultimately, its survival, says Steve Nguyen, a workplace

psychologist and executive trainer.

If you knew that there was malfeasance (say, if the distributor has been paying

kickbacks to place your products in stores or paying bribes to gain entry for

your goods into another country) going on with your products, you would have an

obligation to root it out, even if that meant cutting ties with your

distributor. That s not the case here. This is a question of appearances. You

don t think your distributor did anything wrong with your products, but you re

worried about guilt by association.

One issue is the possible but very real damage to your own company's

reputation when your customers and competitors find out that your distributor

is in trouble for corruption-related dealings, Nguyen said: Just being

associated with this particular overseas distributor might cause your company

to also look guilty, even if there is absolutely no evidence to support this.

As an example for how to handle a similar dilemma, Nguyen cites Apple Inc,

which elected to drop one of its suppliers when it came to light that the

supplier had (illegally) used underage workers. The tech giant also publicised

its supplier responsibility code, using the incident to draw attention to its

existing compliance and accountability policies, Nguyen said.

Consider this a chance to be an ethical leader, to promote and model ethical

behaviour in the workplace and the organisation, Nguyen said. Think about how

your stakeholders would react if they knew you were doing business with a known

corrupt organisation. Now think about how they would take the news that you had

fired this distributor. Which reaction sounds more like the company you want to

run?