STEP 3: THE 5 QUESTIONS BY GRAHAM TUCKER

STEP 3: THE 5 QUESTIONS BY GRAHAM TUCKER

The QuestionDiscuss your thoughtsEthical or Not Ethical

Is the decision profitable?

Yes, the decision making made by Mr. Raju give profit to the company. This is because, he had manipulating the companys financial statement figure and he claim that Rs 649 crore for their operating profit (as against Rs 61 crore reflect the actual operating profit). By this manipulated Satyam computer services limited has good reputation when they awarded as good governance company and gain larger investor and acquired huge client confident by their strong financial statement. Hence, Satyam make higher profit for their company. However it will be profitable to auditor firm too because, in this cases, Price Waterhouse Coopers received double payment from Satyam company since they audited the company for nearly 9 years and did not uncover the fraud.

From the cases, the decision made by Mr Raju the chairman of Satyam and the auditor firm is unethical.

Is the decision legal?

(legal values)

No, the decision making made by Mr Raju is illegal. This is because Mr Raju had manipulated Satyam financial statement by falsified the bank account with balance, that did not exist. He created numerous bank statement and created 6000 fake salaries amount in generated the fraud. The internal auditor also made illegally action by created fake customer identities that reflect to India Law.The global head of internal audit also forged board resolutions and illegally obtained loans for the company. In the cases, the decision made by Mr Raju is unethical because it break the rules and laws.

Is the decision fair to decision maker (The audit firm) & the stakeholders?

No, the decision that made by Mr. Raju is not fair to stakeholder. A good governed company, they should make fairness and accountability decision in their financial statement for their stakeholder information. In this cases, Mr Raju is made unfair decision toward their stakeholder by manipulating the financial statement of the company. Consequently, the accountability of the financial statement is treated and it will resulted bad reputation to the company. When the decision become public, this unfair decision may being its companys auditor and auditing profession into disrepute with the public. The public will claim bad perception toward Price Waterhouse Coopers that the auditor failed to lent credibility to the financial statement and thereby failed to protect the public and shareholder interest.From the view of fairness in this cases the decision maker made a unethical decision because the decision is unfair to all stakeholder.

Is it the right thing to do?

(personal values: personal beliefs &responsibility)No, the decision made by Mr Raju is not a right decision right decision to do. As a decision maker Mr Raju should consider to the other rights of all and not conscious toward company profit only. The decision made by Mr Raju give impacted negatively on the rights of stakeholder in therm of legality and fairness. In this cases, the decision made would be considered s unethical because he provide or disclosed fake information and manipulated the financial statement without attention by companys board, senior managers and auditors. As a stakeholder they have right to know all the decision that Mr Raju made to protect their interest.The decision is unethical because Mr Raju not consider the degree of his stakeholder right in the decision making

Does the proposal provide the highest profit to all & would it benefit stakeholders in future?

Would it bring about future sustainability? Is it sustainable development? (environmental values)

No, the proposal not provide the highest profit to all and its not give benefit to stakeholder in future. From the environmental value or perspective, the decision appears to have nothing to do with the companys impact on the sustainable development. But, to the extant that the proposed decision made in their financial statement by Mr Raju will impacted negatively on future sustainability development and not give benefit to all.. In this cases the decision not treated to sustainability of the company only but, it threated the Indian stock market which is it fell dramatically upon the disclosure of Satyam scandal. Uncertainty pervaded the market during January as investors lost confidence in India's marketsThe decision is unethical because its not give future sustainability to company and the government itself.