Case Study: Coke India

Please read it carefully and weigh the important of the information as you try to advise Coke Indian’s President, Sansei Guppy. Organizing your paper – use these steps to complete your paper. The requirements include a number of “worksheets” designed to help you write a great case. The worksheets should be attached to the end of the case. Worksheets: The case ends on page 13 (before the extra and supporting material) with a series of decisions that Coke India President Sansei Guppy needs to make.
First, putting yourself in President Septa’s shoes, identify the key decisions that he needs to make and make a list. What basic choices are possible? Attach it to your completed paper. Next, create a stakeholders analysis Identifying the parties who have an Interest In this case. Evaluate whether you need to add or subtract from this list. Attach it to your completed paper. (See “How to Construct a Stakeholder Analysis”) Case Analysis: Examine your “decision list” and analyze your decision options from an ethical standpoint.
Keep the stakeholders In mind. Apply each of the three perspectives for making an ethical decision featured In the Decked chapter and the class readings: utilitarianism, profit minimization, and universalism. You are free to apply additional decision-making models from the Decked chapter. Indicate what each of the three perspectives you would choose as the ethical course of action and why. Utilitarian Analysis: Following the Instructions provided in the handout “How to construct a utilitarian stakeholder analysis. Please make sure you use the lists of stakeholders and decisions to check your work to make sure you are thorough. Attach the utilitarian analysis to your completed paper. Support your reasoning by using any of the appropriate readings, from honesty and integrity to corporate social responsibility ideas from Friedman, Stout and Ma (as irruption to be useful. [When in doubt, Just look at the course calendar] Decisions and Conclusions: Clearly indicate final decision(s) that you would make, and the degree to which each decision is consistent with each ethical perspective.

Be as detailed in possible in describing the decision(s) you would make and/or the action(s) you would take. If one or more of the perspectives disagrees with your decision, indicate why you do not choose to follow the guidance of that perspective(s). State what is wrong with the perspective for you, either in the context of the decision, ND/or simply for you as the decision maker. Again, back up your reasoning don’t Just state your opinion or hope I will guess what you are referring to – try using the PAP citation method, such as: (Friedman, p. 9) Length: Approximately 4-6 double-spaced pages, 12-point font and I-inch margins. It will be difficult to present an analysis of sufficient depth in less than 4 pages. The upload link allows for you to upload your essay as an attachment. Please do not cut and paste it into the Submission part of the form. Your grade will be based on the Analysis Paper Rubric provided with the Course Expectations and the Course Calendar. In short: Analytical rigor: depth and complexity in analysis using class readings. To get good grade on this paper (I. . , A or B), you need to apply the ethical perspectives (I. E. , utilitarianism, profit minimization, universalism) in depth. This will require a thorough understanding of the ethical perspectives. If after reviewing the assigned readings (especially the Decked chapter) you do not feel you possess this depth of understanding, you should contact me so that we can go over the ethical perspectives to enhance your understanding. Proofreading and Writing: spelling, grammar, sentence construction as well as clarity, and cohesion.