- April 12, 2014
- Posted by: essay
- Category: Term paper writing
Talfi-Sudbury Canada was a progressing company, which though faced the lawsuit filed by its borrower, who was deceived by the top executive of the company, Liddy. However, the problem had occurred basically because of the poor communication within the company and the violation of legal and ethical norms by Liddy as the top executive of the company. Hence, Talfi-Sudbury Canada should have elaborated the Code of Ethics for all of its executives and employees to make their behavior ethically and legally correct. In addition, the company had to elaborate effective communication system to prevent miscommunication within the company.
Tulfi-Sudbury Canada was a prospective company that grew fast. However, unfair and unethical actions of its top executive have put under the threat the future of the company and its reputation in the market. Talfi-Sudbury launched the project which opened new prospects for the company to gain a larger market share and to increase its revenues. Liddy was appointed as the top executive responsible for the project. However, he failed to complete the project successfully. Moreover, instead of the successful accomplishment of the project, the company has faced the threat of the lawsuits filed by the deceived borrower, who demanded compensations from the company. In such a situation, Liddy just failed to communicate effectively to his subordinates and deceived the borrower. Such actions have actually provoked the lawsuit and uncovered numerous difficulties and problems concerning ethics and conduct of top executives of the company as well as communication problems that affect consistently the performance and marketing position of Talfi-Sudbury Canada.
First of all, one of the major problems the company has faced was the poor communication within the organization that caused the failure of the project the company has been working on. Liddy was appointed as the top executive, who was responsible for the successful accomplishment of the project. He had to create a team working on the project and guide the team toward the completion of the project. Instead, Liddy relied heavily on Hill, who had to perform virtually the lion share of the work on the project, while Liddy carried on negotiation with the borrower accepting all the offers made by the borrower without communicating these offers to Hill properly. In addition, Liddy did not actually guide the team working on the project. Instead, he lost the control over the project and failed to communicate effectively with his subordinates. As a result, the entire project failed.
Being responsible for the project Liddy failed to coordinate his decisions with the borrower. Liddy accepted all the offers made by the borrower concerning the increase of costs of the project but eventually the company could not cover the costs of the project. In such a situation, the project team and Liddy as its leader should be aware of consequences of such decisions for the company. However, Liddy ignored the financial burden the company had to deal with after his decisions being taken. At the same time, the borrower believed Liddy as he represented the company as a top executive.
On the other hand, Liddy issued no legal documents to the borrower concerning the rise of the costs of the project and he acted irresponsibly, when he refused to pay. In such a way, he probably attempted to avoid the legal liability for his actions. At any rate, he had no written agreement with the borrower concerning the increase of the costs of the project. Therefore, Liddy was either unaware of consequences of his actions or he acted negligently in relation to the borrower and to his company because his actions would undermine the confidence of customers and business partners in the reliability of the company. They could hardly believe the company, whose top executive deceives the borrower. In such a way, the image and reputation of the entire company was under a threat, while the borrower filed the lawsuit against the company.
Hence, Liddy as a top executive of the company acted irresponsibly and violated not only ethical but also legal norms, while the poor communication within the company has aggravated the situation even more. The failure of Liddy to develop an effective communication system led him to the dead-end, when his negotiations with the borrower were not fully communicated to the project team, while the project team could not communicate all the problems it faced to Liddy, who was formally the leader of the project team.
In such a situation, the problems faced by Talfi-Sudbury Canada could have been resolved, if the company had an effective communication system. The information flow from top executives to their subordinates was too slow and ineffective. In addition, the company should involve employees into the decision making process to prevent decisions being taken by such top executives as Liddy without consultations with the project team. Moreover, the company should introduce the Code of Ethics and the Code of Conduct that would regulate actions and behavior of top executives and other professionals working in the company.