LO & Big Layoffs LO6129

Andrew Moreno (amoreno@broken.ranch.org)
Tue, 19 Mar 1996 07:37:49 -0800 (PST)

Replying to LO6091 --

On 12 Mar 1996, Rol Fessenden wrote:

> Are they, as partnerships, exempt from the possibility of being unethical
> or doing something illegal? I doubt it.

Or maybe the question could be stated... Do they have the responsibility
to be ethical and to be legal?

Definition of ethical - fair and takes into account the interests of all
stakeholders in the system - not a conflict of interest [even if a
conglomerate or keiretsu _could_ find a way to make things ethical, it
would most likely be labelled unethical by outsiders based on ownership
issues - antitrust laws in the US deal with a similar issue]

Definition of legal - maintains all laws in all countries - actively
pursues a shared context of all laws in all countries - not being
ignorant of laws - not being complacent in pursuing a shared context
[how does a company deal with laws based on the arbitrary whim of a king
as in Borneo or "elder-statesman" as in Singapore or military junta as in

I think a way to increase capabilities to manage complexity could help a
bit. I think subscriptions to Economist Intelligence Unit and HKSBC
country profiles and reports could also help :).

Andrew Moreno


Andrew Moreno <amoreno@broken.ranch.org>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>