Hewlett-Packard spying scandal
In HP's company culture, "trust and respect the individual, respect for employees" is a very important one, HP just made a fatal mistake, to spy out the employee's private. At the same time, we also see, HP "Pretexting" exposes many of enterprise need face that crisis of leakage of information. Along with the development of informatization, network popularization, the leak of enterprise become more than before.
According to Business Ethics NOW, “corporate governance is the process by which organizations are directed and controlled.”(P105) Ethical corporate governance is an important part to running the enterprise. Private information only belong to the individual, others have no right to interfere. If a President of the company often monitor other directors by call records, who will take this job? In order to improve the work efficiency, the board of directors must be mutual trust between each other. After a few years downturn, HP had just come up, and “Pretexting” let Hp a step back again.
It also a model for other enterprises, and at the same time remind all enterprises pay attention to the protection of commercial secrets, also need pay attention to avoid the violation of the enterprise ethics or invasion of privacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/08/technology/08hp.html?_r=0
Thanks for posting this article, it was a joy to read. Being in the technology generation this is always the struggle we face, privacy. People with post their lives on social medias and are surprised when some people or even future employers see it and interpret it differently than intended. If you put it out on the internet people will see it, simple as that. If you don't want them to see it don't post, status, or tweet about it. That being stated there is no room for large companions to gain access to these fills and use them for who knows what. I think it's kind of a faulty system, employers and the social world. However, there is profit to be made online and that is one thing corporations know very well. They'll use any means of a benefit if it creates a dollar bill and in the money driven society we live in. I think it comes down to ethics and which ones will be reflected in your company. Some may say use your resources while others will take a less unethical approach. What makes me mad is that most things are done online these days from paying your bills, to applying for jobs and everywhere in between. It almost seems that you can't help but get online. With it being this way i don't understand how we still have a information leakage problem. We have perfected the internet yet haven't found a way to secure it and I don't see that changing, unfortunately.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe article I found was on General Motors (GM) recent crisis with many of its cars defaulting and their poor handling of it. GM first had reports of cars with faulty ignition switches in 2001 and tried to handle the problem by sending people who owned the cars a part that would prevent the issues. Over then next several years GM began to have more and more complaints with more and more of their cars. This all came to a head in 2014 when the public outcry reached an all time high when it was found out that multiple people had died because of GM’s faulty cars. Mary Barra became the CEO of GM in January and was immediately hit with this issue.
Barra made a statement on behave of GM on their handling of their recall procedure, “The moves come after GM ignited a firestorm of negative publicity by defending how it dealt with reports of defective ignition switches linked to 12 deaths, even though it failed to disclose the issue for more than a decade” (fiscaltimes.com). Barra defended GM and said that they would continue to try and improve their recall procedure, and try and improve the safety of their cars. She took a lot of heat for this because she did not apologize to the victims that had died in connection to the failures of GM’s cars.
Two weeks late Barra made a revised statement apologizing to the victims and vowing that GM would implement new procedures to avoid having more people get injured. Although she apologized, a lot of people found in insincire because they thought GM was only trying to make up for the first statement not apologizing. She also did not engage the media which is what most spokespeople do in situations like this, “Crisis communications experts faulted GM for failing to strike an empathetic tone and not offering an apology that sounded sincere. Barra also failed to keep the story from spreading when she refused to engage the media, which is what experts encourage companies in these situations to do” (fiscaltimes.com).
The article talks about how GM really hurt itself because they put profits ahead of the safety of their customers. Their PR firm as a very tough task of turning this viewpoint that many people have around. Barra finally released a video statement saying that this crisis really hit home for her because of her family and that they have already apologized, but that is only one step in the right direction. Their PR firm as the tough task of regaining the public’s faith. A crisis communications expert is quoted in the article making a very good point about how the public is skeptical of GM’s motives, ““I would give her and GM a ‘C’’ overall for how they are handling the crisis. The big problem with the message is that it’s 13 years too late.… How can we be sure that GM has told us the whole truth and nothing but the truth?” (fiscaltimes.com).
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/03/18/General-Motors-Hits-Reverse-Its-Public-Relations