Parable of sadhu case analysis

A. Read the case titled "The Parable of the Sadhu" at the end of Chapter 2 and answer the following questions: 1. Did McCoy do anything wrong? If so, what and why? 2. What can we say in McCoy’s defense? How might you construct a defense of his actions and argue he either did the right thing, or at least nothing bad? 3. If the Sadhu had been a child, or a beautiful Western woman, do you think McCoy would have gone to the top or stopped and helped? Why or why not? Should that matter? 4. How much should context matter in our analysis? a. Should our standards be different at 15-20,000 feet above sea level on a mountaintop in freezing cold temperatures? b. How about when other individuals and groups are present? Does that make us more or less responsible? c. What needs to change to shift the dynamic and create better outcomes for all stakeholders? 5. McCoy seems to regret his decision to leave the Sadhu. It is a decision he made in just a few moments with little reflection, yet it has had a profound impact on the next 20-30 years of his life. What does this tell you about the challenge of living a good life? If moral dilemmas don’t come before us and announce themselves, how can we do a better job of seeing them coming? What can be learned from moral mistakes? 6. How, if at all, does your view of other moral mistakes you read about (e.g. Enron, Bernie Madoff, the financial crisis) change in the wake of considering this case? Do not answer with just yes or no only. In general, in the course, provide reasons for your answers and base your answers on the subject of the preceding chapter(s). In this case study base your answers on the concepts of chapter 2. It is important to reason your answer. The points are for your reasoning. B. Read the case titled "Business Enterprise Trust: Merck & Co." at the end of Chapter 3 and answer the following questions: 1. How should Roy Vagelos think about this problem? What are some possible approaches to take to framing what is going on here? 2. Does Merck have an obligation to do something here? Does its knowledge create an obligation to act? If so, does that extend to an obligation to spend between $100-200 million of its resources to help? 3. What should be on Vagelos’ radar screen as he thinks about this decision? What specific considerations should he at least note before he gets to a decision? a. Which stakeholders should he think about? What is their interest? b. What is at stake for Vagelos? How will this decision shape him and his character? c. Are there any specific principles that should factor into his decision-making? 4. What do you make of Merck’s mission? What, exactly, does it mean? How important is it to your decision and why? 5. Make a decision: commit to developing the drug now, or decide not to develop it? [Note that with this latter option you are not committed to doing nothing: you can opt to wait until you get someone to pay for it and then develop it later, or simply share your discovery with others and let them pursue a drug. You are simply saying you won’t commit Merck’s resources to developing the drug.] Make the case for your decision: what are the most compelling reasons for your decision? 6. What does this case tell us about the challenge of putting business and ethics together? Do not answer with just yes or no. Provide reasons for your answers and base your answers on the concepts in chapter 3. It is important to reason your answer. The points are for your reasoning TEXTBOOK: Wicks, Freeman, Werhane, and Martin, Business Ethics –A Managerial Approach, New York, NY (USA): Pearson education, 2010 (ISBN-13 = 978-0-13-142792-1) ...