The purpose of this case report is to identify the legal and ethical issues in the Martha Stewart case study. I will discuss these issues, compare Ms. Stewart’s actions against the ethical theories, draw conclusions to the lessons learned, and make recommendations to limit future outcomes. This case study is not about Ms. Stewart direct participation with illegal insider trading as the media had steered the public to believe. To begin, Ms. Stewart received a phone call from Ann Armstrong, her assistant, stating that Peter Bacanovic, her stockbroker, “thinks ImClone is going to start trading down.” (Arnold, Beauchamp, Bowie, 2013, p. 390) Although Ms. Stewart was not able to get a hold of Peter, she talked to his assistance, Douglas Faneuil, …show more content…
Stewart did afterward was illegal. She lied about knowing the fact that the Waksal family was selling their shares and falsified the phone message log before having second thoughts and had her assistance restored the original message. Furthermore, she jointly collaborated an untruthful story with her broker to indicate that there was a stop order to sell the stock at $60 per share (SEC, 2003). Whereas, the actions of Sam Waksal, CEO of ImClone, were considered insider trading and illegal. Insider trading is when information is used to make a timely sale when the public doesn’t have access to the same information (Boatright, 2013). The law requires that if the information is considered important by a reasonable investor then it is illegal insider trading (Henning, 2012). Mr. Waksal knew about the FDA rejection of his company’s drug trial and tried to sell all his stocks before the public got a chance to review the same information and perhaps be able to execute similar sell orders. Normative ethical theory is the study of “What constitutes an acceptable ethical standard for business practice, and by what authority is the standard acceptable?” (Arnold, Beauchamp, Bowie, 2013, p. 17) Utilitarian, Kantian, and Virtue theories will be compared against Ms. Stewart’s actions in the ImClone …show more content…
Stewart had an ego, was arrogant, and made a rash decision without rationalizing it through. Her ego allowed the situation to spiral and then conceal the truth. She should have divulged the truth, accepted the judgment, and learned not to rush impulse decision. She was arrogant and believed she was untouchable by the law. Her past experience might have led her to believe that the legal system could not take her down (Rawding, 2014). Lessons learned are that eventually, it cost her more financially to fight than to plead and her actions will stay with her throughout her career and in this case, to restore and upkeep her brand name. According to one of the jurors, Chappell Hartridge, “Absolutely. We’re talking about two human beings whose lives are going to be changed forever.” (Ackman,
Dennis Kozlowski was living his dream as a multimillionaire and if anyone got in the way of his dream to create his empire then they would be stepped on like a bug. This is what happened to Jeanne Terrile at Merrill Lynch. Terrile smelled something funny coming from Tyco and when she acknowledged that something was wrong, she was shut down quickly. Nobody knows for sure if Kozlowski paid off the CEO of Merrill Lynch, David Komansky, or not and nobody knows what they talked about. The fact is that Jeanne Terrile was replaced and the stock recommendation for Tyco soon changed after their talk. Terrile decided to do what she thought was right and make sure to notify people of what she thought of the company. Because of Terrile’s ethical decision
In other words, its buying and selling of securities that has obtained non-public material information, and in Martha’s case she was guilty of it. “However in an interesting legal technicality, Martha Stewart did not necessarily breach a fiduciary duty to the other investors, since she had no real obligations to inform other investors, which would be the case if she were an officer with company (US SEC, 2009). This being said, if she confessed her actions were wrong, she would not have been convicted of insider trading. Insider trading can be either legal or illegal due to the nature and the timeframe. This was not the road that Martha Stewart decided to take. ‘She instead chose to collide with her broker in an attempt to barricade a story about how there was a standing order for Ms. Stewart to sell her shares” (US SEC, 2009). Martha Stewart had knowledge on the ethics surrounding trading of stock having already been a CEO, she should have known what she was doing, but one can argue that due to her crazy work life, she simply did no think about it. It shows that she is not engaging in illegal behavior. “Martha Stewart displayed her morality lies when lying to the US authorities even thought this was obviously illegal and unethical; her action can also be analyzed through egoism philosophy where right or acceptable behavior defined in terms of consequences to the individual, regarding maximizing self0interest” (Carr, 2002). Martha Stewart thought she did everything right, but still did not bother to warn the shareholders. If insider trading had not taken place, it would be less of a crime, but her actions indicated unethical behavior and define lack of integrity, and lying to Federal investigators only made it
2.Goodpastor, Kenneth. Nash, Laura. de Bettignies, Henri-Claude. Business Ethics: policies and persons 4th edition. Mcgraw Hill Irwin Publishers. Pages 396-405
Ferrell, O.C. "Business Ethics." Ethical Decision Making and Cases. Michele Rhoades, Joanne Dauksewicz. Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning, 2011. Print.
The purpose of this paper will be to identify and describe ethical tactics used in the Jeanne Lewis case. The writer will also discuss Jeanne Lewis's ethical behavior in light of her decision to work with her employees until she was confident in the strength of her team.
Werhane, Patricia H. "The Indefensibility of Insider Trading." Journal of Business Ethics September 1991: 729-731.
Jordan Belfort is the notorious 1990’s stockbroker who saw himself earning fifty million dollars a year operating a penny stock boiler room from his Stratton Oakmont, Inc. brokerage firm. Corrupted by drugs, money, and sex he went from being an innocent twenty – two year old on the fringe of a new life to manipulating the system in his infamous “pump and dump” scheme. As a stock swindler, he would motivate his young brokers through insane presentations to rile them up as they defrauded investors with duplicitous stock sales. Toward the end of this debauchery tale he was convicted for securities fraud and money laundering for which he was sentenced to twenty – two months in prison as well as recompensing two – hundred million in restitution to any swindled stock buyers of his brokerage firm (A&E Networks Television). Though his lavish spending and berserk party lifestyle was consumed by excessive greed, he displayed both positive and negative aspects of business communications.
Martha Stewart made a kind of securities fraud known as "insider trading" which means using insider information to make a stock transaction. It is trading in the stock market, making improper use of inside information. This information, most of the time, is held by directors of listed companies and those who provide investment services or counseling.
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2013). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases: 2011 custom edition (9th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Martha Stewart has risen to national prominence as the ultimate host, media star and designer. She crafted a unique brand and built it into a multibillion-dollar business empire. She was charged, convicted and served prison time for insider trading, becoming one of the most famous felons of her generation. Stewart then rebuilt her prominent status after this fall from grace and retained her leadership role in the public company she founded. Her resilience has been an inspiration to millions of adoring fans across all demographics. Stewart did not just break the glass ceiling, she shattered it. Evolving from model to culinary superstar, to publishing mogul, she has redefined what is possible for women to achieve. She has done it all and true to her brand, she has made it look easy and effortless along the way.
The movie “Glengarry Glen Ross” presented a series of ethical dilemmas that surround a group of salesmen working for a real estate company. The value of business ethics was clearly undermined and ignored in the movie as the salesmen find alternatives to keep their jobs. The movie is very effective in illustrating how unethical business practices can easily exist in the business world. Most of the time, unethical business practices remain strong in the business world because of the culture that exists within companies. In this film, the sudden demands from management forced employees to become irrational and commit unethical business practices. In fear of losing their jobs, employees were pressured to increase sales despite possible ethical ramifications. From the film, it is right to conclude that a business transaction should only be executed after all legal and ethical ramifications have been considered; and also if it will be determined legal and ethical to society.
Shaw, W. & Barry, V. (2010). Moral issues in business (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2011). Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases. Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.
Jordan Belfort is the notorious 1990’s stockbroker who saw himself earning fifty million dollars a year operating a penny stock boiler room from his Stratton Oakmont, Inc. brokerage firm. Corrupted by drugs, money, and sex, he went from being an innocent twenty – two year old on the fringe of a new life to manipulating the system in his infamous “pump and dump” scheme. As a stock swindler, he would motivate his young brokers through insane presentations to rile them up as they defrauded investors with duplicitous stock sales. Toward the end of this debauchery tale he was convicted for securities fraud and money laundering for which he was sentenced to twenty – two months in prison as well as recompensing two – hundred million in restitution to any swindled stock buyers of his brokerage firm. Though his lavish spending and berserk party lifestyle was consumed by excessive greed, he displayed both positive and negative aspects of business communications.
Shaw, W. H., & Barry, V. (2011). Moral Issues in Business (Eleventh ed., pp. 230-244).