Answer? 1) Yes, it is a bit ironic. If a company has an Ethics program that's comprehensive enough, executives should not have to be caught in business criminal activities.
2.) First let's talk about Ethics programs. These are basically programs that embody the business philosophies of a company such that every stakeholder understand how business is run in the company. It basically defines to employees, staff, investors, vendors and customers the rules of Business Ethics as defined by the firm, from the maximum amount of tips to collect from customers to how intimate employees get with clients so that there's no confusion. Now, all this is to clarify but the question here is how effective was the program if criminal activity was discovered? It's simple. The most comprehensive Ethics programs can't control human circumstantial behaviour. As clear as rules may be, they are always still broken. And this is because, with humans, there an infinite number of things to put into consideration, most of which won't always follow rules. One may be 100% compliant with said rules but find themselves weak to give in at some point for any possible reason the person deemed more important than upholding the companies ethics. In other words, these rules are held by the people it binds and the delivery will always be subjective. Whenever it is deemed unfavorable to uphold, it most likely will be dropped.
Therefore, it might have been the most effective and comprehensive Ethics program in the world but only as effective as the executives demmed it subjectively.
Many public figures defend the correlation between the access to violence in media sources and real-world violence and aggression. Back in the 5th century B.C , even Plato worried about the possible effects of violence and that violent themes in plays would have in society. Nowadays, some scholars speculate that some fans of such media may become more aggressive or immoral. Yet, nothing has been proved, and the correlation between violent media and actual violence are still considered inconclusive. <u>Some social scientists who believe in the correspondence of violence and violent media</u>; however, <u>believe that violent media would cause gamers to lose empathy towards the victims displayed in the media and thus more likely to commit acts of violence.</u>
The correct answer is the actor-observer bias.
The actor-observer bias (AOB) refers to the phenomenon where we attribute our own behavior to external factors beyond our personal control, while attributing others' behavior to factors internal to them, and fully within their control. In this instance, Tom believes that he is unable to stop gambling due to the negative influence of his friends (an external factor beyond his control), while believing that Barnaby is unable to stop gambling because he is addicted to it (a factor internal to Barnaby). Thus, Tom is demonstrating the actor-observer bias
The primary advantages of the corporate form of business compared to a sole proprietorship or partnership are double taxation and more paperwork.
Corporate means relating to giant companies, or to a selected large company. Interest rates are higher for corporate purchasers than for personal clients. The economy is growing, and company profits are rising. company means regarding large companies or a particular large company. A corporate life cycle is the stages of growth ANd development that almost every company goes through from the initiation of the corporate to its end, which might be available in a spread of ways. The four stages of a professional life cycle are the Startup stage. Growth and institution stage.
Corporate jobs are positions at intervals in a company organization. This generally means an employee position at intervals in a bigger company, organization, or corporation
Learn more about corporate here
brainly.com/question/13551671
#SPJ4
