Cross Cultural Perspectives Essay Example for Free

Cross Cultural Perspectives Essay The Microsoft Corporation is a fortune 500 company that ranked # 35 on the fortune 500 list in 2013 (Fortune 500, 2013) and is one of the largest business corporations in the world. It was founded in 1975 by two guys named Paul Allen and Bill Gates, the business developed very rapidly as the years went by and reached a marker of 89,000 employees, with a revenue of $62 billion dollars and had offices located all over the world (Fortune 500, 2011). From the initial headquarters that is held in Albuquerque New Mexico, the Microsoft Company steadily increased the offices held within the United States and expanded that to include more than 100 countries abroad. This expansion into different countries became a challenge because of having to deal with new lifestyles, new cultures, people, and languages. Proper research needed to be conducted not to mention the implementation of a proper working strategy to help the integration of these new ethics and cultures into those of the Microsoft Corporation. The homepage of the Microsoft Corporation shares a summarized version of its culture and says â€Å"We as individuals and as a company value honesty, integrity, constructive self criticism, openness, mutual respect, and continual self improvement† (Microsoft Corporation, 2011). The Microsoft Corporation also presents their official responsibilities as part of their ethical obligation. â€Å"We at the Microsoft Corporation hold ourselves accountable to our shareholders, customers, employees, and partners, and we do this by honoring our commitment, providing results, and striving for the highest quality possible† (Microsoft Corporation, 2011). When making a move into new cultures and countries, it becomes very important for employees old and new to not only understand but also accept the Microsoft Corporations ethics and culture. As we all know Microsoft products are used all over the world in both businesses and homes. When they first made the decision to open an office in Lebanon, a majority of the computers ran on the Microsoft Windows operating system and the Windows Office program was the most popular word processing and spreadsheet program. However, there was a problem and that problem was the fact that there was a bunch of versions of this system that had been pirated and distributed in that country. In a country where buying a five dollar pirated software program from a local computer store made it a little hard in terms of convincing some people that it was not only unethical but also illegal. This brings about the question of, â€Å"How is The Microsoft Corporation going to sell authentic versions of their software when there are pirated versions being distributed at such a cheaper price not to mention a lack of government control involved†? Because of this, Microsoft proceeded to send letters to these major organizations warning them against using this pirated software. They also offered to visit these businesses in order to conduct a site survey so that assessments could be made in terms of what software would fit the company the best and at what the cost would be. The Microsoft Corporation also provided the organization that behaved ethically and invited Microsoft in for the survey assessment; Microsoft turned around and gave them a very good price deal on the software. Microsoft also introduced to them a payment facility for the companies that had to make large purchases of the software in order to get licenses for the pirated software they already had in place. Everyone knows that not all organizations and businesses operate within ethical boundaries. Lebanon, just like the U. S. , is similar in the fact that it is an individualist culture. However, bribery is common throughout this country. Microsoft has an ethical standard that is against these types of acts and it is totally against their integrity. It was however, improbable to sell these authentic copies to many of these businesses without presenting these managers with some type of gift in exchange. Some of these organizations proceeded to offer gifts to the Microsoft Corporation’s employees. They in return were hoping for some type of special discount, or a deal would not work out. The Microsoft Corporation has an ethical obligation to their shareholders and that obligation is to protect and increase the value of the shares. The Microsoft Corporation has to be able to earn a said profit in order for the share values to increase. On a bad note, Microsoft cannot legitimately sell software copies in a country that has corruption and bribery within its ethics and culture. According to Transparency International â€Å"The transparency in Lebanon ranked 2. 5 out of 10 in the world in 2010† (Corruption Perception Index 2010 Results, 2010). When comparing that score to 8. 9 out of 10 in Canada and 7. 1 out of 10 in the United States, the difference is quite staggering. Microsoft has to be able to find a way to adapt their approach in order to conclude some type of successful business in the country of Lebanon. According to the text book â€Å"The biggest source of anxiety for business people in America who operate abroad is the expectations of bribes and payoffs† (Trevino Nelson, 2007). When the Microsoft management team was faced with bribes or offerings in order to sell their software to the organizations who where operating on pirated copies, they in return chose to use an ethical model in order to make a decision in regards of choosing which course of action would be best to take. The judicial systems of these countries that have a low transparency, that are similar to those in Lebanon, are very weak. So filing a lawsuit against the businesses that are running the pirated versions of the Microsoft software programs would turn out to be very costly, time consuming and may end up yielding no type of results in the end. Management teams that are faced with different types of ethical situations can apply different types of ethical models in order to help assist in the process of decision making. In the case of bribing a manager of an organization in order to purchase software that is legal, it is possible that they could apply the utilitarianism ethical model. By looking at the result, it might be easy to try and make a decision on whether or not the employees at the Microsoft Corporation may try and bribe a business into purchasing Microsoft software that is legal. On a positive note, Microsoft selling more software to organizations and businesses that need it or may already be using it may help in the reduction of software being pirated within the country. The share prices at Microsoft are being maintained by the revenue and the employees receiving a commission. On the negative side, if a bribe is being paid to an employee or a member of the business or an organization who is purchasing the Microsoft software. The Utilitarianism’s ethical model shows approval of this as a decision that is ethical. Being able to apply different ethical models, such as the deontological model may end up having different ending results. The question that this raises is â€Å"Should all businesses or organizations pay some type of bribe or bribes in order to help sell their products? † The answer to this naturally is, â€Å"no†. Global businesses are faced with many different challenges everyday as they expand into different foreign organizations. Ethical challenges will always arise for an organization as they expand. The ethical decisions made in regards to different business matters can usually be solved by applying the different ethical models that are available. There are plenty of tools available for helping solve arising ethical problems and they need to be used so they may be helpful in making solutions. With the launch of Microsoft in the country of Lebanon they need to confront these ethical issues of bribery so that they can enter the market. The Microsoft Corporation must learn to adapt their policies in order to comply with the ethical standards they have in the country of Lebanon. References Corruption Perception Index, 2010 results (2010). Transparency International Retrieved August 11, 2013 from https://www. transparency. org/policy_research/surveys Fortune Global 500 (2011) CNN Money, Retrieved August 11, 2013 from https://money. cnn. com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011 Microsoft Corporation (2011) About Microsoft, Retrieved August 10, 2013 from https://www. microsoft. com/about/en/us/default. aspx Trevino. L. K Nelson. K. L (2007) Retrieved August 9, 2013 from Managing Business Ethics (4th Ed). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley Sons.

condoms Essay -- essays research papers

Why people do not use condoms Many men and women prefer unprotected intercourse or using another contraceptive method rather than using a condom. Among currently married women of reproductive age, only 5 percent use condoms for contraception worldwide, and only 3 percent in less developed regions of the world, according to United Nations estimates of contraceptive use. In this chapter we a re going to analyze or try to explain why some people don’t use condoms. In order to do this, we used some theory of the book ‘Social Psychology’ (7th edition) by David G. Meyers. Also we used much information that we got from the internet. In the above mentioned book, they explained that each construes the human skin as a special boundary that separates one set of casual forces from another. On the sunny side of the epidermis are the external or situational forces that press inward upon the person, and on the meaty side are the internal or personal forces that exert pressure outward. Sometimes these forces press in conjunction, sometimes in opposition, and their dynamic interplay manifest itself as observable behavior. In the figure below you can see a figure which explains Harold Kelly’s theory of attribution. Through the figure above, you can conclude yourself whether the following reasons are internal or external attribution. In addition we divided the causes in two parts. The first one is the reasons of the people in the developed countries and the second part is about the reason of the people in the developing countries. Developed Countries The most frequent reasons people in the developed countries give for not using a condom relate to the following issues: lack of sensation or interrupted sexual pleasure; psychological and social factors, including couple communication and assumptions that condoms are for use in extramarital relationships and with prostitutes; lack of availability of condoms, including policies that prohibit condom distribution to youth; and lack of confidence in the reliability of condoms themselves. To make condoms more acceptable and more widely used, all of these issues should be addressed. Factors affecting the acceptability of condoms can be thought of as a series of concentric circles that interact with each other -- from the individual at the center to the couple, the health-care system, the community and the entire world. An ... ...ong young people. Fearing that it will promote sexual activity out-of-wedlock, many service providers and pharmacists do not make condoms easily accessible to youth. Adolescents may hesitate to obtain condoms available at clinics because service providers act judgmentally towards them. Young women may be especially timid because it is considered inappropriate for them to seek condoms. Limited distribution systems complicate access, especially in rural areas. Government outlets may be relatively few and widely dispersed or private-sector sources may favor wealthier urban areas, resulting in uneven availability within a country. In 2000, donors provided less than one billion of the estimated eight billion condoms required in developing countries and Eastern Europe to greatly expand access for those in need. Many developing country governments are providing and promoting condoms as part of their HIV prevention strategies, but for the poorest countries, assistance from the wealthier developed countries remains the main source of condoms. In other countries, sustainable prevention efforts that include promotion and provision of condoms are hurt by inadequate government commitment.

Gathering Research Data-Police Officers and Job Hazards Essay

What is the goal or purpose behind your proposed research? The purpose of this study is to identify the degree to which quality of performance by police officers is affected by actual hazards in the execution of their jobs. What type of interview structure would you use? Why? The interview will be structured to answer the two main questions; what hazards police officers are faced with? How does it determine the way an order is executed? Obviously, the interviewing questionnaire would consist of three parts. The first section will ask basic biographical questions pertaining to gender, length of time in the service among other items relevant to the study. Sections two and three would embody responses pertaining to the research hypothesis. It would be so designed to offer scope for comparative an analysis between the variables quality of performance on the jobs and hazards affecting execution of duties. It is important for it to be structured in this way to excluded biases in the study. As such the research would create a balance. This is expected to expose transparency and validity. What would be some questions you would ask? Why? Biographical data— Age, sex, marital status, length of service, educational back ground and rank. Questions pertaining to work performance— The likert scale could be used here to solicit responses. From a scale 1-5 five being the highest, rate the extent to which you love your job; what tasks you like performing best? (A list of duties will be offered to be circled); what are do you feel you perform best? A list of tasks will be offered as a selection) Questions pertaining to hazards—A likert scale could be adopted for the first responses. Rate using the scale 1-5 five being the highest; how likely are you to proceed with the order of arresting a harmed criminal? How would you react if instructed to conduct a investigation in a know drug infested community (a list of options will be designed for selection). What is your perception of hazards in the execution of you duties? This would be an opened ended question without a structured response. These are the questions which would most likely offer the basis for a comparative analysis of the research. What are some distinct advantages of a qualitative data-gathering strategy, such as participant observation, over more quantitative approaches? It is a mater of subjectivity as against objectivity. Respondents during a quantitative research believe that they are expected to behave in a particular way so they act it. This violates internal validity. In a qualitative analysis the sampled populations do not know that they are being researched. Therefore there is no compromised behavior. Hence the criteria of validity can be precisely evaluated. The only subjectivity to the research are those influenced by the researchers’ paradigms. When conducting survey research, how important is informed consent and confidentiality? From the perspective of both the police as a public offer and the police as a researcher the question of informed consent and confidentiality borders on professional ethics; be it a professional researcher or police officer. It is therefore pertinent that legal rights to privacy be maintained at every level of institutionalized practice. The real importance lies in the fact that the legislated right to privacy must be adhered to. It spreads across vey discipline. Information derived from studies such as these are used to redesign public policy. As such the participants must give written or verbal consent for the information to be used for what it was intended. It must also be confirmed that information would not be shared to jeopardize their future.

SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission

The well known and widely scorned court case Citizens United has been credited with paving the way for the creation of super PACs, the hybrid political groups  that are allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from corporations and unions  to influence American elections. But there would be no super PACs without a lesser known, companion court challenge to Federal Election Commission fundraising laws,  SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission. The nonprofit political group, organized under Internal Revenue Service Section 527, is just as instrumental in the creation of super PACs as Citizens United.   Summary of SpeechNow.org v. FEC SpeechNow.org sued the FEC in February 2008 claiming the $5,000  federal limit  on how much individuals can give to a political committee such as its own, which therefore limited how much it could spend supporting candidates,  represented a violation of the Constitutions First Amendment guarantee to freedom of speech.   In May of 2010, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of SpeechNow.org, meaning the FEC could not longer enforce the contribution limits to independent groups.   Argument in Support of SpeechNow.org The Institute for Justice and the Center for Competitive Politics, which represented  SpeechNow.org, argued that the fundraising limits were a violation of free speech, but also that the FECs rules requiring it and similar groups to  organize, register, and report as a â€Å"political committee† in order to advocate for or against candidates was too burdensome. That means that while Bill Gates one his own could spend as much of his money as he wanted on political speech, he could contribute only $ 5,000 to a similar group effort.  But since the First Amendment guarantees individuals the right to speak without limit, it should be common sense that groups of individuals have the same rights.  It turns out that these limits and red tape made it virtually impossible for new independent citizen groups to raise start-up funding and effectively reach voters.   Argument Against SpeechNow.org The governments argument against SpeechNow.org was that allowing contributions of more than $5,000 from individuals  could â€Å"lead to preferential access for donors and undue influence over officeholders.† The government was taking the tack that its ruled are designed to prevent corruption. The court rejected that argument, though, in the wake of the January 2010 decision in Citizens United, writing:  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Whatever the merits of those arguments before  Citizens United, they plainly have no merit after  Citizens United†¦.Contributions to groups that make only independent expenditures cannot corrupt or create the appearance of corruption.† Difference Between SpeechNow.org and Citizens United Cases Though the two cases are similar and deal with independent  expenditure-only committees, the SpeechNow court challenge focus on federal  fundraising caps. Citizen United successfully challenged the  spending limit on corporations,  unions, and  associations. In other words, SpeechNow focused on raising money and Citizens United focused on spending money to influence elections. Impact of  SpeechNow.org v. FEC The  U.S. District Court for the District of Columbias ruling the case, combined with the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in Citizens United, together paved the way for the creation of super PACs. Writes Lyle Denniston on SCOTUSblog: While the  Citizens United  decision dealt with the spending side of federal campaign finance, theSpeechNow  case was on the other side — raising funds. Thus, as a result of the two decisions put together, independent advocacy groups can raise as much and spend as much as they can and wish to do to support or oppose candidates for federal office.   What is SpeechNow.org? According to SCOTUSblog, SpeechNow was created specifically to spend money advocating for the election or defeat of federal political candidates. It was  founded  by  David Keating, who at the time headed the conservative, anti-tax  group  Club for Growth.