business ethics for engineers - tepper school of businesspublic.tepper.cmu.edu/jnh/workshop.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Bu
sin
ess
Eth
ics
for
En
gin
eers
Joh
n H
oo
ker
May
20
00
Bu
sin
ess
and
En
gin
eerin
g
•E
ng
inee
rs a
re m
ore
invo
lved
in b
usi
nes
s m
anag
em
ent
than
eve
r.–
Sta
rtu
p c
om
pan
ies.
–In
teg
rate
d p
rod
uct d
evel
opm
ent c
ycle
s.
–B
iote
ch a
nd
e-c
om
mer
ce r
aise
new
eth
ical
is
sues
.
•E
ng
inee
rs a
re in
crea
sin
gly
exp
ose
d to
issu
es
of b
usi
nes
s et
hic
s.
To
day
’s T
op
ics
•P
rofe
ssio
nal
Eth
ics
•Q
ual
ity a
nd
Saf
ety
•In
telle
ctu
al P
rop
erty
•In
tern
atio
nal
Bu
sin
ess
Eth
ics
Pro
fess
ion
al E
thic
s
Pro
fess
ion
al E
thic
s
•P
rofe
ssio
nal
s:–
are
exp
erts
;
–u
se e
xper
tise
resp
on
sib
ility
;
–b
elo
ng
to a
pro
fess
ion
al o
rder
.
•W
hy
pro
fess
ion
s?–
Eas
ier
to id
entif
y co
mp
eten
ce.
–C
an id
entif
y in
com
pet
ence
bef
ore
it is
too
late
.
–E
ng
inee
ring
cle
arly
nee
ds
pro
fess
iona
lism
.
Pro
fess
ion
al E
thic
s
•P
rofe
ssio
nal
ob
ligat
ion
s ar
e n
arro
wer
th
an
eth
ical
du
ties
in g
ener
al.
–T
he
wh
ole
po
int o
f a p
rofe
ssio
n is
to e
stab
lish
a re
pu
tatio
n (a
nd
live
up
to it
).
–P
rofe
ssio
nal
co
nd
uct
is w
hat
the
rep
uta
tion
lead
s p
eop
le to
exp
ect.
–D
eter
min
ing
pro
fess
iona
l ob
ligat
ion
is m
ore
a
mat
ter
of s
oci
olo
gy th
an e
thic
s.
Bu
sin
ess
as a
Pro
fess
ion
?
•“P
rofe
ssio
nal
” d
utie
s o
f bu
sin
ess
man
ager
s an
d d
irect
ors
hav
e b
een
nar
row
ly c
on
stru
ed.
–S
tric
tly a
fidu
ciar
y d
uty
to o
wn
ers
(in
vest
ors
, st
ock
hold
ers)
.
–F
idu
ciar
y d
uty
is s
tric
tly fina
ncia
l -m
ake
lots
o
f mo
ney
. N
ot a
llow
ed to
thin
k ab
ou
t eth
ics
if it
imp
edes
pro
fit.
–T
his
pro
tect
s fid
uci
arie
s fr
om
fri
volo
us
law
suits
.
Du
ties
of M
anag
ers
•A
bu
ses
of 1
98
0’s
cre
ated
a b
ackl
ash
.–
Ram
pan
t pla
nt c
losi
ngs
to r
elo
cate
offs
hor
e.
–D
ow
nsi
zing
ou
t of c
on
tro
l.
•“S
take
ho
lder
” th
eory
dev
elo
ped
.–
A b
usi
ness
has
du
ties
to e
mp
loye
es, c
ust
om
ers,
co
mm
un
ity a
s w
ell a
s o
wn
ers.
–B
ut h
ow
are
thes
e d
utie
s re
con
cile
d?
Du
ties
of M
anag
ers
•A
bro
ader
co
nce
ptio
n o
f fid
uci
ary
du
ty.
–M
anag
ers
and
dir
ecto
rs r
epre
sen
t ow
ner
s w
ith
resp
ect t
o th
eir
eth
ical
du
ty a
s w
ell a
s th
eir
finan
cial
inte
rest
s.
–S
om
e st
ates
(e.
g.,
Pen
nsy
lvan
ia)
reco
gn
ize
a co
rpo
rate
ch
arte
r th
at a
llow
s d
irec
tors
to
con
side
r et
hic
al is
sues
.
Qu
ality
an
d S
afet
y
Qu
ality
an
d S
afet
y
•H
ow
to
bal
ance
qu
ality
an
d s
afet
y ag
ain
st
cost
?
•H
ow
saf
e is
saf
e?
•W
hat
to
do
wh
en m
anag
ers
wan
t to
cu
t co
rner
s?
Th
e B
usi
nes
s V
iew
•T
he
new
co
mp
etiti
ve e
nvi
ron
men
t–
Lack
of t
rad
e b
arri
ers
stiff
en g
lob
al
com
pet
ition
.
–Ja
pan
ese
qu
ality
an
d e
ffici
ency
set
new
st
and
ard
s in
19
80
’s.
–Le
an m
anu
fact
uri
ng n
ow
a n
eces
sity
.•
Sm
all l
ot s
izes
, set
up ti
mes
, inv
ento
ry le
vels
.
–R
apid
pro
du
ct d
evel
opm
ent c
ycle
s.
Th
e B
usi
nes
s V
iew
•If
the
firm
can
’t co
mp
ete,
man
ager
s w
ill g
et
the
bla
me.
•Q
ual
ity a
nd
saf
ety
rais
e th
e p
rice
of
the
pro
du
ct.
–Id
eally
, th
e co
nsu
mer
dec
ides
how
to b
alan
ce
qu
ality
an
d s
afet
y ag
ain
st c
ost
.
–B
ut q
ual
ity a
nd
saf
ety
oft
en c
ann
ot b
e ev
alu
ated
un
til lo
ng
aft
er th
e p
urc
has
e.
Th
e B
usi
nes
s V
iew
•S
o th
ere
is m
arke
t fa
ilure
. T
he
go
vern
men
t an
d e
ng
inee
ring
pro
fess
ion
mu
st s
tep
in.
–T
rad
emar
ks.
–S
afet
y re
gu
latio
ns.
–P
rod
uct
liab
ility
su
its.
–P
rofe
ssio
nal
co
des
an
d s
tan
dar
ds.
•E
ng
inee
rs h
elp
sh
ape
the
envi
ron
men
t in
w
hic
h th
e m
anag
er m
ust
co
mp
ete.
Th
e Le
gal
Vie
w
•W
hat
are
a c
om
pan
y’s
leg
al d
utie
s to
cu
sto
mer
s?
•T
hre
e th
eorie
s o
f pro
du
ct li
abili
ty.
–C
on
trac
tual
theo
ry.
–D
ue
care
theo
ry (
pri
mar
ily E
uro
pe)
.
–S
tric
t lia
bili
ty (
US
A).
•La
rger
pro
ject
s ar
e g
ove
rned
by
tort
law
.
Pro
du
ct L
iab
ility
•C
on
trac
tual
th
eory
.–
A p
rod
uct
mu
st b
e fit
for
the
pu
rpo
se fo
r w
hic
h
it is
so
ld (
oth
erw
ise,
failu
re o
f co
nsi
der
atio
n).
•U
nifo
rm C
omm
erci
al C
ode
deve
lops
thi
s in
to
conc
ept o
f impl
ied
war
rant
y.
•U
sual
ly n
ot o
verr
idde
n by
exp
ress
war
rant
y, u
nles
s so
ld “
as is
.”
–A
n u
nsa
fe p
rod
uct
is u
nfit
for
its p
urp
ose
.
Pro
du
ct L
iab
ility
–S
elle
r is
liab
le o
nly
for
con
trac
tual
dam
ages
, an
d n
ot a
ny
oth
er h
arm
the
bu
yer
may
su
ffer.
–T
her
e m
ay b
e fu
rth
er p
enal
ties
if fr
aud
is
invo
lved
.
Pro
du
ct L
iab
ility
•D
ue
Car
e T
heo
ry (
Eu
rop
e)–
Pro
du
ct m
anu
fact
ure
mu
st m
eet
stan
dard
s se
t b
y st
atu
te.
–S
elle
r is
liab
le fo
r h
arm
cau
sed
by
def
ects
on
ly
if st
anda
rds
wer
e n
ot m
et.
–O
rig
in o
f IS
O s
tan
dar
ds.
Pro
du
ct L
iab
ility
–Ju
stifi
catio
n: p
ure
ly c
on
trac
tual
dam
ages
do
n’t
pro
vid
e m
anu
fact
ure
r en
ou
gh
ince
ntiv
e to
be
dili
gen
t.
–Ju
stifi
catio
n: c
on
trac
tual
theo
ry a
ssu
mes
that
p
artie
s ar
e w
ell i
nfo
rmed
, im
po
ssib
le fo
r co
mp
lex
pro
du
cts.
Pro
du
ct L
iab
ility
•S
tric
t lia
bili
ty (
US
A)
–M
anu
fact
ure
r is
liab
le fo
r an
y d
amag
es c
ause
d
by
pro
du
ct d
efec
ts.
–T
his
ap
plie
s n
o m
atte
r h
ow
car
efu
l th
e m
anu
fact
ure
r is
.
–E
volv
ed o
ut o
f U.S
. ca
se la
w, n
ot s
tatu
te.
–Ju
stifi
catio
n: r
egu
latio
ns c
anno
t kee
p u
p w
ith
inn
ova
tive,
hig
h-t
ech
ind
ust
ry.
Pro
ject
s
•Q
ual
ity o
f w
ork
go
vern
ed b
y co
ntr
act
law
.–
Co
ntr
act u
sual
ly li
sts
spec
ifica
tions
.
–It
sta
tes
that
pro
ject
will
be
com
ple
ted
in
“wo
rkm
anlik
e m
ann
er,”
wh
ich
is d
efin
ed b
y p
rofe
ssio
nal p
ract
ice
and
co
des
, pu
blic
ex
pec
tatio
ns.
–F
irm
s th
at a
sk e
ng
inee
rs fo
r su
bst
and
ard
wo
rk
can
be
sued
for
bre
ach
of c
on
trac
t.
Pro
ject
s
•S
afet
y g
ove
rned
by
tort
law
.–
A f
irm
th
at b
uild
s an
un
safe
bri
dg
e o
r h
eart
va
lve
can
be
hel
d li
able
for
dam
ages
if it
is
neg
ligen
t.
–N
eglig
ence
is la
ck o
f du
e ca
re, a
s d
efin
ed b
y p
rofe
ssio
nal c
od
es a
nd
pra
ctic
es, a
nd
pu
blic
ex
pec
tatio
ns.
–N
eglig
ence
can
be
crim
inal
if it
invo
lves
re
ckle
ss d
isre
gar
d fo
r sa
fety
.
Th
e E
ng
inee
r’s
Du
ty
•A
n e
ng
inee
r’s p
rofe
ssio
nal
ob
ligat
ion
is
def
ined
by
the
pro
fess
ion
’s r
epu
tatio
n.
–T
his
is r
efle
cted
in le
gal
sta
nd
ards
, pro
fess
iona
l
cod
es a
nd
pu
blic
exp
ecta
tions
.
–V
arie
s ac
ross
cu
lture
s (V
olv
o vs
. Fer
rari
).
–E
xam
ple
: 19
99
ear
thq
uak
e in
Tu
rkey
.
Th
e E
ng
inee
r’s
Du
ty
•E
ng
inee
rs a
re a
lso
bo
un
d b
y o
blig
atio
ns
that
ap
ply
to
hu
man
bei
ng
s in
gen
eral
.–
Sh
ou
ld o
ne
pra
ctic
e en
gin
eerin
g a
t all?
–It
is a
deq
uat
e m
erel
y to
mee
t p
ub
lic
exp
ecta
tions
?
–W
hat
hap
pen
s w
hen
ther
e ar
e n
o c
lear
st
and
ard
s o
r ex
pec
tatio
ns (
e.g
., C
hal
leng
er
case
)?
Wh
istle
Blo
win
g
•W
hat
is t
he
eng
inee
r’s d
uty
wh
en th
e fir
m
beh
aves
un
eth
ical
ly?
•O
ptio
ns:
–B
low
the
wh
istle
, in
tern
ally
or
pu
blic
ly.
–R
esig
n.
–K
eep
qu
iet a
nd
do
wh
at th
e co
mp
any
wan
ts.
Wh
istle
Blo
win
g
•S
om
e co
nsi
der
atio
ns:
–W
his
tle-b
low
ing
(esp
ecia
lly e
xter
nal
) is
ty
pic
ally
trau
mat
ic fo
r th
e em
plo
yee
and
oft
en
inef
fect
ive.
–R
esig
natio
n m
ay v
iola
te m
utu
al o
blig
atio
ns o
f em
plo
yer
and
em
plo
yee.
•Lo
ok a
t the
con
vers
e:
shou
ld fi
rm fi
re a
n un
ethi
cal
empl
oyee
or
try
to c
orre
ct h
im/h
er?
•P
erha
ps a
n un
ethi
cal f
irm h
as a
lread
y vi
olat
ed it
s du
ties
to e
mpl
oyee
s.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty
•A
s d
esig
ner
s, e
ng
inee
rs d
o li
ttle
bu
t cre
ate
inte
llect
ual
pro
per
ty.
•B
iote
ch a
nd
co
mp
utin
g h
ave
com
plic
ated
th
e is
sues
.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty L
aw
•Le
gal
ly,
inte
llect
ual
pro
per
ty is
:–
A p
aten
ted
inve
ntio
n.
–A
tra
de
secr
et.
–C
op
yrig
hte
d m
ater
ial.
Pat
ents
•A
pat
ent g
ran
ts th
e o
wn
er e
xclu
sive
rig
hts
fo
r 1
7 y
ears
in e
xch
ang
e fo
r p
ub
lic
dis
clo
sure
of
the
inve
ntio
n.
–O
ne
can
no
t pat
ent a
pu
re id
ea, s
uch
as
a m
ath
emat
ical
theo
rem
.
–O
ne
can
pat
ent a
met
ho
d, p
rod
uct
, ap
par
atu
s,
com
po
sitio
n o
f mat
ter,
des
ign
for
artic
le o
f co
mm
erce
, ce
rtai
n k
ind
s o
f pla
nt.
–A
n a
lgo
rith
m o
r co
mp
ute
r co
de
is a
“m
eth
od
.”
Pat
ents
–O
ne
can
no
t pat
ent a
nyth
ing
that
occ
urs
in
nat
ure
.
–O
ne
can
no
t pat
ent a
“w
ay o
f do
ing
bus
ines
s.”
–T
he
dis
clo
sure
mu
st b
e sp
ecifi
c en
ou
gh
to
allo
w a
per
son
ski
lled
in th
e ar
t to
re-
crea
te a
nd
u
se th
e in
ven
tion.
Pat
ents
•T
he
inve
ntio
n m
ust
be:
–U
sefu
l
–N
ove
l•
Not
kno
wn
or u
sed
in th
e U
SA
prio
r to
pat
ent
appl
icat
ion.
•N
ot p
aten
ted
or p
ublis
hed
outs
ide
the
US
A m
ore
than
one
yea
r pr
ior
to a
pplic
atio
n.
–U
no
bvi
ous
•T
he id
ea w
as n
ot o
bvio
us to
one
ski
lled
in th
e ar
t at
the
time
of in
vent
ion.
Tra
de
Sec
rets
•A
tra
de
secr
et is
a s
ecre
t fo
rmu
la,
pat
tern
or
dev
ice
that
is u
sed
in a
bu
sin
ess
and
p
rovi
des
a c
om
mer
cial
ad
van
tag
e.–
A t
rad
e se
cret
last
s fo
reve
r (n
ot j
ust
17
yea
rs)
or
un
til th
e se
cret
get
s o
ut.
•C
oca-
Col
a fo
rmul
a.
–W
hile
the
law
pro
hib
its o
ther
s fr
om
us
ing
a p
aten
ted
inve
ntio
n (
with
ou
t per
mis
sio
n),
it o
nly
p
roh
ibits
oth
ers
fro
m stea
ling
a tr
ade
secr
et.
Tra
de
Sec
rets
–S
teal
ing
a tr
ade
secr
et is
mis
app
rop
riatio
n o
f in
telle
ctu
al p
rop
erty
, a c
rim
e.
–It
is O
K t
o c
reat
e a
trad
e se
cret
ind
epen
dent
ly
and
use
it.
–R
ever
se e
ng
inee
ring
is n
ot t
hef
t of a
trad
e se
cret
.
Co
pyr
igh
ts
•A
co
pyr
igh
t lim
its t
he
nu
mb
er o
f co
pie
s o
ne
can
mak
e o
f a d
ocu
men
t o
r w
ork
of a
rt
with
ou
t per
mis
sio
n.
–C
op
yrig
hts
hel
d b
y in
div
idua
ls la
st 5
0 y
ears
b
eyo
nd
ow
ner
’s li
fetim
e.
–Id
eas
can
no
t be
copy
rig
hted
.
–O
nly
par
ticul
ar e
xpre
ssio
ns o
f id
eas
are
sub
ject
to
co
pyr
igh
t.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty O
wn
ersh
ip
•A
pat
ent i
s re
gis
tere
d in
the
nam
e o
f th
e in
ven
tor,
bu
t an
oth
er p
erso
n o
r co
rpo
ratio
n
can
ow
n it
.
•A
per
son
wo
rkin
g “
for
hire
” m
ust
tu
rn o
ver
ow
ner
ship
to th
e em
plo
yer.
–“F
or
hir
e” =
the
per
son
hir
ed is
no
t bei
ng
pai
d
for
a sp
ecifi
c p
rod
uct b
ut f
or
any
job
-rel
ated
o
utp
ut.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty O
wn
ersh
ip
–A
fu
ll-tim
e em
plo
yee
wo
rks
for
hir
e.•
Com
pany
has
rig
hts
to a
ny jo
b-re
late
d id
eas,
eve
n if
deve
lope
d at
hom
e in
the
gara
ge.
•3-
M e
mpl
oyee
who
inve
nted
pos
t-it
note
s fo
r hi
s ch
urch
cho
ir ha
d to
turn
ove
r rig
hts
to th
e co
mpa
ny.
–C
on
sulta
nts
may
or
may
no
t wo
rk fo
r h
ire.
•D
epen
ds o
n sp
ecifi
cs o
f co
ntra
ct.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty O
wn
ersh
ip
–A
Ph
.D. s
tud
ent w
ho
is “
hir
ed”
to w
rite
a
par
ticul
ar a
lgo
rithm
do
es n
ot w
ork
for
hir
e.•
The
stu
dent
has
rig
hts
to th
e al
gorit
hm, u
nles
s th
ere
is a
n ag
reem
ent
to th
e co
ntra
ry.
–A
pro
fess
or’s
ou
tpu
t und
er a
go
vern
men
t gra
nt
is g
ove
rned
by
the
con
diti
ons
of t
he
awar
d.
–B
y tr
aditi
on,
a p
rofe
ssor
ret
ain
s ri
gh
ts to
sc
ho
larl
y b
oo
ks a
nd
art
icle
s.•
But
uni
vers
ities
can
and
som
etim
es d
o m
odify
the
se
right
s in
the
empl
oym
ent
cont
ract
.
Inte
llect
ual
Pro
per
ty R
igh
ts
•W
hat
can
an
inve
nto
r d
o a
bo
ut l
ack
of
righ
ts?
No
t mu
ch.
–M
ake
sure
pat
ent i
s re
gis
tere
d in
inve
nto
r’s
nam
e.
–M
entio
n p
aten
ts in
art
icle
s an
d g
ran
t pro
po
sals
.
–N
ego
tiate
an
em
plo
ymen
t co
ntr
act t
hat
rew
ard
s in
ven
tion.
–B
uy
the
com
pan
y.
So
ftwar
e
•S
oft
war
e o
wn
ersh
ip w
ent t
hro
ug
h s
ever
al
stag
es t
hat
invo
lved
bo
th p
aten
t an
d
cop
yrig
ht l
aw.
–
Th
e ke
y is
sue
was
wh
eth
er a
n a
lgo
rith
m is
a
pu
re id
ea.
So
ftwar
e
•It
is n
ow
rec
og
niz
ed t
hat
an
alg
orit
hm
or
soft
war
e d
esig
n c
an b
e p
aten
ted
as
a m
eth
od
o
r p
roce
ss.
–M
ach
ine
cod
e o
r so
urc
e co
de
can
be
cop
yrig
hte
d.
–S
oft
war
e th
at im
ple
men
ts a
pro
ced
ure
onc
e d
on
e b
y h
and
may
no
t be
pat
enta
ble
if it
auto
mat
es a
“w
ay o
f do
ing
bu
sin
ess.
”
So
ftwar
e
•O
ne
can
no
t pat
ent o
r co
pyr
igh
t th
e “l
oo
k an
d f
eel”
of a
use
r in
terf
ace.
–T
his
allo
ws
for
stan
dar
diza
tion
acro
ss v
end
ors
.
–M
icro
soft/
Ap
ple,
Lo
tus/
Bor
lan
d.
Pat
entin
g L
ife
•O
ne
can
no
t pat
ent a
n o
rgan
ism
th
at o
ccu
rs
in n
atu
re.
•H
ow
ever
, o
ne
can
pat
ent a
gen
etic
ally
al
tere
d o
rgan
ism
.–
U.S
. S
up
rem
e C
ou
rt, D
iam
on
d v
Ch
akra
bar
ty,
19
80
.
–O
ne
get
s cr
edit
for
the
entir
e o
rgan
ism
aft
er
tinke
ring
with
its
DN
A.
Pat
entin
g L
ife
•D
iscl
osu
re r
equ
irem
ent
limits
gen
eral
ity o
f p
aten
t.–
Ph
ilip
Led
er p
aten
ted
gen
etic
ally
en
gin
eere
d
mo
use
that
co
nta
ins
can
cer-
caus
ing
gen
es, a
nd
an
y si
mila
r m
ou
se.
–“S
imila
r m
ou
se”
mu
st b
e en
gin
eere
d a
cco
rdin
g to
the
tech
niq
ue d
iscl
osed
in L
eder
’s p
aten
t ap
plic
atio
n (J
erem
y R
ifkin
no
twith
stan
ding
).
Nee
mix
Cas
e S
tud
y
•W
. R
. Gra
ce p
aten
ted
nee
mix
, d
eriv
ed f
rom
se
eds
of n
eem
tre
e, w
hic
h g
row
s n
atu
rally
in
Ind
ia.
•P
aten
t w
as c
hal
len
ged
on
two
gen
eral
g
rou
nd
s:–
Nee
m s
eed
s ar
e n
atu
ral a
nd b
elo
ng
to e
very
on
e.
–N
eem
ext
ract
s an
d th
eir
effe
cts
are
trad
ition
al
kno
wle
dge
in In
dia
n c
ultu
re.
Nee
mix
Cas
e S
tud
y
•C
an G
race
pat
ent a
su
bst
ance
that
occ
urs
in
nee
m s
eed
s?–
No
. T
hey
can
no
t pat
ent a
nyt
hin
g th
at o
ccu
rs in
n
atu
re.
–G
race
pat
ente
d a
mo
re s
tab
le fo
rm o
f nee
m
seed
ext
ract
.
Nee
mix
Cas
e S
tud
y
•C
an G
race
pat
ent a
nee
m e
xtra
ct t
hat
is
trad
itio
nal
kn
ow
led
ge
in In
dia
?–
No
t in
Ind
ia.
Th
ey d
idn
’t tr
y.
–T
hey
go
t a U
.S.
pat
ent b
ecau
se
•th
e ex
trac
t had
not
bee
n kn
own
or u
sed
in th
e U
SA
pr
ior
to th
e pa
tent
app
licat
ion
•T
he e
xtra
ct h
ad n
ot b
een
pate
nted
, nor
the
idea
pu
blis
hed,
in In
dia
a ye
ar o
r m
ore
prio
r to
the
pate
nt
appl
icat
ion.
Nee
mix
Cas
e S
tud
y
–S
up
po
se p
aten
ts e
xten
ded
acr
oss
inte
rnat
ion
al
bo
un
dar
ies.
•N
eith
er U
.S.
nor
Indi
an c
ompa
nies
wou
ld b
e ab
le to
pa
tent
trad
ition
al In
dian
kno
wle
dge.
•B
ut U
.S. c
ompa
nies
wou
ld b
e en
title
d to
vid
eo
roya
lties
in In
dia.
•F
irst-
wor
ld in
telle
ctua
l pro
pert
y w
ould
hav
e th
e ad
vant
age.
Ow
ner
ship
of G
enet
ic M
ater
ial
•Is
it r
igh
t to
vie
w g
enet
ic m
ater
ial a
s in
telle
ctu
al p
rop
erty
?–
Tra
diti
ona
l pro
per
ty s
yste
ms
reco
gn
ize
seve
ral
typ
es o
f pro
per
ty a
nd
lim
it ex
chan
ge.
–W
e d
o th
is in
a li
mite
d w
ay n
ow
: law
s ag
ain
st
pro
stitu
tion
; fo
od
sta
mp
s, fr
equ
ent f
lyer
b
enef
its.
Ow
ner
ship
of G
enet
ic M
ater
ial
–H
isto
rica
lly, e
con
om
ic s
yste
ms
hav
e m
ove
d in
a
dir
ectio
n o
f to
tal e
xch
ange
abili
ty.
•A
bolit
ion
of c
hatt
el s
lave
ry w
as a
not
able
exc
eptio
n.
–E
con
om
ists
arg
ue
that
res
tric
tions
on
exc
han
ge
sim
ply
lead
to b
lack
mar
kets
.•
For
exa
mpl
e, fo
od s
tam
ps.
–H
ow
ever
, ele
ctro
nic
veri
ficat
ion
can
lim
it ex
chan
geab
ility
.•
For
exa
mpl
e, fr
eque
nt f
lyer
mile
s.
Ow
ner
ship
of G
enet
ic M
ater
ial
–M
ich
ael W
alze
r ar
gu
es th
at li
mits
on
ex
chan
geab
ility
pro
mo
te ju
stic
e.
•P
erh
aps
it is
ag
ain
tim
e to
sca
le b
ack
pro
per
ty r
igh
ts, a
s w
as d
on
e w
ith s
lave
ry?
–T
her
e is
no
pro
ble
m o
f a b
lack
mar
ket.
–B
ut t
his
rem
ove
s p
art o
f th
e in
cen
tive
to in
vest
in
gen
etic
en
gin
eerin
g.
Ow
ner
ship
of G
enet
ic M
ater
ial
•A
co
mp
rom
ise:
–If
gen
etic
or
oth
er e
ng
inee
ring
cre
ates
a p
rod
uct
w
ith n
ew e
ffec
ts, a
llow
pat
ent p
rote
ctio
n.
–O
ther
wis
e al
low
co
mm
erci
aliz
atio
n w
itho
ut
pat
ent p
rote
ctio
n.
–T
hu
s N
eem
ix w
ou
ld n
ot r
ecei
ve p
aten
t p
rote
ctio
n.
–In
the
mea
ntim
e, w
ork
tow
ard
a m
ore
just
sy
stem
of p
rop
erty
ow
ner
ship
.
Inte
rnat
ion
al B
usi
nes
s E
thic
s
Inte
rnat
ion
al B
usi
nes
s E
thic
s
•E
ng
inee
ring
pro
ject
s ar
e fr
equ
ently
in
tern
atio
nal
.–
En
gin
eers
fin
d th
emse
lves
wo
rkin
g a
nd
do
ing
b
usi
nes
s w
ith p
eop
le o
f diff
eren
t cu
ltura
l b
ackg
roun
ds.
Inte
rnat
ion
al B
usi
nes
s E
thic
s
•W
hile
Wes
tern
ers
bel
ieve
th
at e
very
on
e is
o
r sh
ou
ld b
e b
asic
ally
th
e sa
me,
cu
lture
s d
iffer
fun
dam
enta
lly.
–T
he
key
to w
ork
ing
in a
mu
lticu
ltura
l set
ting
is
to a
ckn
ow
ledg
e th
e p
oss
ibili
ty a
nd
leg
itim
acy
of r
adic
ally
diff
eren
t ap
pro
ache
s to
life
.
Inte
rnat
ion
al B
usi
nes
s E
thic
s
•W
ill f
ocu
s h
ere
on
:–
“Co
rru
ptio
n”-
-kic
kbac
ks, c
ron
yism
, n
epo
tism
, b
rib
es.
•T
hese
are
cor
rupt
ing
in th
e W
est;
may
or
may
not
be
corr
uptin
g el
sew
here
.
•O
ther
sys
tem
s ca
n be
cor
rupt
ed,
but i
n di
ffere
nt
way
s.
–W
om
en in
bu
sine
ss.
•W
este
rner
s no
tice
the
diffe
renc
e, b
ecau
se it
is a
hi
gh-p
rofil
e is
sue
back
hom
e.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•K
ickb
acks
–A
pu
rch
asin
g ag
ent m
ay r
ecei
ve p
aym
ents
fro
m
a su
pp
lier
in e
xch
ange
for
a co
ntr
act.
–T
his
is c
orr
up
t in
the
Wes
t bec
ause
it im
plie
s co
nfli
ct o
f in
tere
st.
•T
he p
urch
aser
is s
uppo
sed
to c
onsi
der
the
com
pany
’s in
tere
st, n
ot h
is/h
er o
wn.
•D
ecis
ions
are
bas
ed o
n tr
ansp
aren
cy:
the
bids
, in
form
atio
n ab
out t
he b
idde
rs, e
tc.
Co
rru
ptio
n
–In
an
oth
er s
yste
m,
on
e d
oes
bu
sin
ess
with
a
per
son
, no
t a c
om
pan
y.•
Bus
ines
s is
bas
ed o
n a
long
-ter
m r
elat
ions
hip
that
bu
ilds
trus
t.
•W
hen
ther
e ar
e pr
oble
ms,
it is
no
use
to c
all a
la
wye
r.
On
mus
t rel
y on
the
rela
tions
hip.
•It
is th
eref
ore
in th
e co
mpa
ny’s
inte
rest
for
the
agen
t to
bui
ld th
ese
rela
tions
hips
. T
here
is n
o co
nflic
t of
inte
rest
.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•T
he k
ickb
ack
mak
es it
cle
ar t
hat t
he s
elle
r is
ser
ious
ab
out t
he r
elat
ions
hip.
If
he h
as in
vest
ed in
the
rela
tions
hip,
he
is u
nlik
ely
to d
isap
pear
whe
n th
ere
are
prob
lem
s.
–In
so
me
par
ts o
f th
e w
orl
d, k
ickb
acks
are
w
ritt
en in
to th
e co
ntr
act.
•A
cur
ious
res
ult o
f im
posi
ng th
e fo
reig
n id
ea o
f a
writ
ten
cont
ract
.
•A
con
trac
t pr
esup
pose
s a
univ
ersa
l fra
mew
ork
of
rule
s an
d ju
stic
e, in
whi
ch m
ost c
ultu
res
do n
ot
belie
ve.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•C
ron
yism
–In
mo
st o
f th
e w
orl
d, o
ne
lets
co
ntr
acts
to o
ne’
s fr
ien
ds.
•G
uanx
i in
Chi
na.
•B
onds
of a
ffect
ion
and
frie
ndsh
ip in
Lat
in A
mer
ica.
•O
ld-b
oy n
etw
orks
in J
apan
and
Kor
ea.
–It
is a
nyt
hin
g b
ut t
ran
spar
ent.
•
It m
ay b
e in
sulti
ng to
ask
a b
usin
ess
part
ner
for
acco
untin
g da
ta, b
ecau
se it
impl
ies
lack
of
trus
t.
Co
rru
ptio
n
–In
mu
ch o
f th
e w
orl
d, c
ron
yism
pro
vid
es th
e so
cial
glu
e th
at m
akes
bu
sin
ess
po
ssib
le.
•G
reat
civ
iliza
tions
thriv
ed o
n th
is s
yste
m f
or
mill
enni
a.
•T
he A
sian
fin
anci
al c
risis
res
ulte
d la
rgel
y fr
om la
ck
of c
rony
ism
, no
t the
rev
erse
. (
Chi
na a
nd T
aiw
an
wer
e la
rgel
y un
scat
hed.
)
•C
rony
ism
ref
lect
s et
hica
l sen
sibi
litie
s th
at a
re le
ss
deve
lope
d in
the
Wes
t --
hono
r, lo
yalty
to
frie
nds,
se
nsiti
vity
to
need
s of
ass
ocia
tes.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•N
epo
tism
–Y
ou
r as
soci
ates
may
ask
yo
u to
em
plo
y th
eir
rela
tives
.•
Thi
s is
ofte
n un
ethi
cal i
n th
e W
est d
ue to
con
flict
of
inte
rest
.
•It
is s
tand
ard
prac
tice
in m
uch
of t
he w
orld
.
Co
rru
ptio
n
–In
man
y cu
lture
s n
epot
ism
has
ad
van
tage
s.•
The
bos
s is
intim
atel
y aw
are
of a
bilit
ies
and
can
assi
gn d
utie
s ac
cord
ingl
y.–
Dut
ies
are
det
erm
ined
mo
re b
y d
irec
t sup
ervi
sio
n t
han
wri
tten
job
des
crip
tions
.
•T
he a
utho
rity
of a
n el
der
fam
ily m
embe
r ca
n in
duce
re
lativ
es to
pro
duce
mor
e th
an o
ther
s w
ith g
reat
er
tale
nt.
–T
he
mai
n r
easo
n fo
r n
epo
tism
is th
e p
rim
acy
of
the
fam
ily.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•B
ribes
–D
efin
ition
var
ies.
•M
any
view
a k
ickb
ack
as a
“co
mm
issi
on,”
not
a
brib
e.
•A
than
k-yo
u gi
ft m
ay b
e vi
ewed
as
grat
itude
rat
her
than
brib
ery,
eve
n if
ther
e is
som
e qu
id-p
ro-q
uo.
–C
on
sequ
ence
s va
ry.
•In
Chi
na, b
riber
y ca
n be
pun
ishe
d w
ith d
eath
by
firin
g sq
uad.
•In
Tur
key,
the
pol
ice
ask
you
to p
ay t
hem
a b
ribe.
Co
rru
ptio
n–
Fre
qu
ency
var
ies.
•In
Sin
gapo
re,
no o
ne d
ares
.
•In
Chi
na, i
t is
ubiq
uito
us.
–B
rib
ery
may
or
may
no
t be
corr
up
ting.
•In
Sou
th K
orea
, ex
ecut
ives
giv
e w
hite
env
elop
es f
ull
of c
ash
to g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls a
s a
norm
al p
art o
f do
ing
busi
ness
.–
The
bri
be
assu
res
the
gove
rnm
ent
offi
cial
that
the
ex
ecut
ive
will
ab
ide
by
regu
latio
ns t
o a
void
losi
ng a
rela
tions
hip
in w
hich
he
has
inve
sted
.
–N
ot n
eces
sari
ly c
orr
uptin
g, a
ltho
ugh
exp
osu
re b
rin
gs lo
ss
of f
ace.
Co
rru
ptio
n
•In
Jap
an, b
riber
y is
cor
rupt
ing
beca
use
it un
derm
ines
gro
up lo
yalty
.
•In
Chi
na, i
t is
corr
uptin
g be
caus
e it
shor
tcut
s gu
anxi
and
wea
kens
gov
ernm
ent
pow
er.
•In
Mal
aysi
a an
d In
done
sia,
unc
lear
.
•In
Rus
sia
and
east
ern
Eur
ope,
an
unm
itiga
ted
evil.
•In
Afr
ica,
brib
es s
o in
flate
the
cost
of
doin
g bu
sine
ss
that
the
econ
omy
is c
rippl
ed.
•In
Indi
a, g
over
nmen
t of
ficia
ls c
ould
not
sub
sist
w
ithou
t sid
e pa
ymen
ts.
Co
rru
ptio
n
–U
.S.
Fo
reig
n C
orr
up
t Pra
ctic
es A
ct fo
rbid
s b
rib
ery
of g
ove
rnm
ent o
ffici
als
in o
ther
co
un
trie
s.•
Doe
s no
t for
bid
paym
ents
to
busi
ness
peo
ple.
•D
oes
not f
orbi
d pa
ying
ext
ortio
n m
oney
or
faci
litat
ing
paym
ents
.
•F
orbi
ds w
hat i
s al
read
y ill
egal
in m
ost o
f th
e w
orld
.
•Is
onl
y oc
casi
onal
ly e
nfor
ced.
–In
an
y ev
ent,
bri
ber
y is
ris
ky.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s
•T
he
case
stu
dy
“Fo
reig
n A
ssig
nm
ent”
d
escr
ibes
a f
emal
e b
ank
man
ager
in th
e U
SA
wh
o r
equ
ests
a t
ran
sfer
to M
exic
o
City
.–
Sh
e en
cou
nte
rs p
atro
niz
ing
att
itude
s fr
om
co
wo
rker
s an
d la
ck o
f res
pec
t fro
m c
lien
ts.
–S
he
dec
ides
to r
esis
t rat
her
than
acq
uie
sce.
–S
he
rece
ives
luke
war
m e
valu
atio
ns,
an
d h
er
care
er b
eco
mes
bo
gg
ed d
ow
n.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s
•T
o r
ejec
t o
r tr
y to
ch
ang
e cu
ltura
l tra
its
imp
lies
a ju
dg
men
t.–
Wes
tern
ers
are
no
tori
ous
for
pas
sing
jud
gmen
t, d
ue
to a
str
on
g te
nd
ency
to u
niv
ersa
lize
thei
r o
wn
po
int o
f vie
w.
–It
is b
est t
o u
nd
erst
and
beh
avio
r in
its
larg
er
con
text
firs
t.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s
•In
this
cas
e, mac
hism
o is
at
issu
e.–
It e
mp
has
izes
man
ly h
on
or
and
has
his
tori
cal
roo
ts in
Mo
ori
sh S
pai
n.
–It
is a
str
ess
con
tro
l mec
han
ism
that
giv
es m
en
a se
nse
of c
on
trol
ove
r th
eir
fate
.•
His
toric
ally
Lat
in A
mer
ican
men
face
d a
life
of
viol
ence
and
dan
ger.
•B
y us
ing
any
mea
ns to
take
cha
rge,
vio
lenc
e if
nece
ssar
y, m
en r
egai
ned
a se
nse
of c
ontr
ol o
ver
thei
r liv
es.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s
•T
his
mad
e a
virt
ue o
f nec
essi
ty.
One
cou
ld fa
ce
dang
er w
ith c
oura
ge a
nd h
onor
, lik
e a
man
, rat
her
than
giv
e in
to fe
ar.
–T
he
flip
sid
e is
Mar
iani
sma.
•P
atro
nizi
ng a
ttitu
de to
war
d w
omen
doe
s no
t im
ply
that
they
are
infe
rior;
onl
y th
at th
ey h
ave
a di
ffere
nt
role
.
•T
hey
are
mor
ally
sup
erio
r an
d de
serv
e pr
otec
tion.
•W
hat U
.S. w
omen
reg
ard
as d
emea
ning
, tr
aditi
onal
L
atin
aw
omen
acc
ept
as a
sig
n of
res
pect
.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s•
In r
ecen
t tim
es, m
achi
smo
in u
pp
er c
lass
es
has
bec
om
e d
evo
tion
to f
amily
.–
A M
exic
an b
usi
nes
sman
pu
ts h
is fa
mily
fir
st.
–M
exic
ans
jud
ge
a g
oo
d fa
mily
man
as
a m
an o
f h
on
or
and
ther
efo
re tr
ust
wo
rth
y in
bu
sin
ess.
–T
his
co
ntr
asts
with
U.S
. b
usi
nes
s, w
hic
h o
ften
d
eman
ds
tota
l co
mm
itmen
t, as
tho
ug
h fa
mili
es
did
no
t exi
st.
–U
.S.
bu
sin
ess
peo
ple
mig
ht e
nvy
this
asp
ect o
f m
achi
smo.
Wo
men
in B
usi
nes
s
•T
he
Wes
tern
hab
it o
f vie
win
g c
ultu
res
as
sim
ply
mo
re o
r le
ss a
dva
nce
d is
inad
equ
ate.
–D
iffer
ent c
ultu
res
solv
e lif
e’s
pro
ble
ms
in
diff
eren
t way
s an
d m
ake
diff
eren
t tra
deo
ffs.
–A
cu
lture
dev
elo
ps s
om
e as
pec
ts o
f hu
man
p
ote
ntia
l wh
ile s
up
pre
ssin
g o
ther
s.
–O
ne
ben
efit
of w
ork
ing
in a
no
ther
cu
lture
is th
e o
pp
ort
unity
to b
rin
g o
ut a
sid
e o
f on
e’s
char
acte
r th
at w
ou
ld b
e in
app
ropr
iate
at h
om
e.