Lack of warehousing facilities and transportation systems add to the ineffectiveness of the plant. Considering the other options suggested to him by his staff, Elliott has chosen the temporary New England plant as the stop-gap solution.
If Byte hid the temporary nature of the facility, the funding for the projects would be supplied, but in three years when the plant closed, and the community could become an unemployed ghost town.
Additionally, patent issues could not be properly protected in the international environment. How to cite this page Choose cite format: Williams stated the influx of workers and their families, approximately 4, people, would seriously disrupt the small New England community. Corporate Legality versus Corporate Resp What impact does the closing have on the employees.
Pressler decided to reposition all the three brands, giving each a distinctive identity. In a shared facility, Byte would not have much control over production.
Employee relationships may be difficult to manage. He entered into a franchise agreement with the leading retailers in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and the Middle East to open Gap and Banana Republic stores there.
The strong union presence would require complex negotiations and labor contracts. However, the New England plant would be closed in three years when the new plant opened. Not knowing the job is temporary, many employees may begin to make a permanent home for their families, buy houses, set down roots.
It turned out that Gap had been sending the same size assortments to stores with different selling patterns He initiated customized deliveries—for instance, sending extra-large to places that needed them.
Threat of new entrants: As the case ends - Williams is asked whether a compromise can be reached. Another alternative would be to plan production of the new plant to open in stages.
In some ways, as compared with licensing, the temporary plant seems like the solution. Alternative courses have been explored - 1 license Byte products and technology to other U.
To show how one vote of dissent can sway a vote of the board after a long discussion of the pros and cons of a proposal. The recommendations need not to be specific to the organization examined, but should consider how other organizations, if similarly situated, could lessen the impact of the problem or decision identified.
New schools, businesses, hospitals, housing and retail establishments would be necessary to care for the new Byte employees. Alternative courses have been explored - 1 license Byte products and technology to other U. Considering the other options suggested to him by his staff, Elliott has chosen the temporary New England plant as the stop-gap solution.
Bargaining power of buyers: To illustrate the power of the board of directors.
Gap was ranked 52nd by the Business Week Interbrand survey conducted in August. Free Essay: 9/13/ The Recalcitrant Director at Byte Products, Inc. CORPORATE LEGALITY VERSUS CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY | The Recalcitrant Director at.
We will write a custom essay sample on The Recalcitrant Director at Byte products, Inc. specifically for you for only $ $/page. Order now Recommended Solutions: Opening a new temporary plant may be an ideal answer to solve a current problem, but the New England location is far from ideal, but to avoid bad reputation that may raise.
This solution was excellent till the recalcitrant director pointed out the ethical dilemma. The main reason is that the firm needs more production capacity now and the new plant will start operation only three years down the line.
Answer to 1 Case 1 The Recalcitrant Director at Byte Products, Inc. Corporate Legality Versus Corporate Responsibility Dan R.
Dalton, Richard A.
Cosier, and. The Recalcitrant Director at Byte, Inc.: Corporate Legality Versus Corporate Responsibility I. ABSTRACT Mr. James Elliott, CEO and Chairman of Byte Products, Inc., presents his recommendation to the Board of Directors to purchase an existing plant in Plainville as.
Answer to Case 1: The Recalcitrant Director at Byte Products Inc.: Corporate Legality versus Corporate Responsibility (Corporate G.The recalcitrant director