Central Georgia Technical College Kobe Steel Company Business Ethics Paper
Question Description
Purpose: In the first assignment, you have the opportunity to see ethics in play in a real world scenario. You will read the case scenario and answers the questions in a narrative format. Use headings for each question. Headings are not the question. You are required to use the course material to support your reasoning and the conclusions made.
Outcomes met by completing this project:
1. identify ethical issues that arise in domestic and global business environments using an understanding of ethical concepts and of legal and business principles
Case Scenario:
Kobe is one of the largest steelmakers in the world and the third largest steelmaker in Japan with more than 200 subsidiaries and 62 affiliated companies in Europe, Asia, and North America. On April 1, 2018, Kiroya Kawasaki stepped down as CEO and President of Kobe Steel in the wake of an investigation after the company admitting to widespread falsification of quality data about metal supplied to automobile companies such as Toyota, Honda, Mazda, Subaru, Nissan and Ford. Kobe Steel had been falsifying quality data for as many as 10 years and was aware the company was selling substandard metal (aluminum, copper and powdered steel) that was used in making molded part to companies around the world.
Steel making is crucial to Japan’s economy and reputation for precision manufacturing providing a competitive edge over China and other countries that offer cheaper alternatives. However, this latest scandal continues to chip away at Japan’s already marred reputation. In 2016, Suzuki Motors and Mitsubishi admitted to cheating on test that exaggerated the fuel economy on its vehicles and Takata recalled tens of millions of vehicles for faulty airbags forcing the company into bankruptcy.
Noted by a corporate watchdog, Japanese companies have been considered diligent about quality control but due to time, competitive pressure or other factors, when cheating occurred, it went unchecked. Also, Japanese companies tend to discourage thorough examination or criticism from employees or independent examiners.
At Kobe, employees were supposed to test products to ensure design standards outlined in specific customer contracts were met. Kobe Steel admitted that in some cases the test were not carried out and in several instances employees deliberately altered inspection certificates or recorded false results to make it appear tests were carried out to meet quality standards. Kobe also admitted that employees at several factories altered inspection certificates on copper and aluminum products between September 2016 and August 2017. The altered records made it appear that its products met manufacturing specification set by its customers. Two known incidents of data falsification related to tensile strength, which is vital to the resistance of a material breaking under stress and powdered steel used in molded metal parts. Kobe sent the quality data to its customer who in turn approved shipment of the goods to customers.
After admitting to widespread tampering of quality data, authorities in Japan and the United States started investigating Kobe. With at least five decades of data fraud, more than 600 customers were identified as affected by Kobe’s actions. Kobe Steel supplies manufacturing parts for automobiles, trains, aircrafts, electronics and other metal products. During the internal review, Kobe confirmed findings of data falsification stating that the problem spanned four percent of the company’s output between September 2016 and August 2017. Affected products included the following products that were shipped to approximately 200 companies:
19,300 tons of flat-rolled and extruded aluminum products
19,400 units of aluminum casting and forgings
2,200 tons of copper products
At the time, Kobe Steel declined to reveal the names of the companies affected but indicated it had not received any complaints from customers using the affected products.
In October of 2017, Kobe Steel established an Independent Investigation Committee (IIC) that reviewed the company’s shipments between September 2016 and August 2017. The company recognized misconduct that covered the act of fabricating inspection data that did not meet customer specifications and public standards and the shipping and delivering of products to customers as if the products conformed to customer specifications and public standards.
Findings of the report revealed the involvement of executive officers in the misconduct but stated the involvement was limited to the Aluminum and Copper Business. Two executive officers were aware of the misconduct but did not report the issue to their boss who was the Head of the Aluminum and Copper Business. Another executive who was aware of the misconduct made the decision as a basic policy to gradually eliminate the production and shipment of nonconforming products. He also decided