Product details

By continuing to use our site you consent to the use of cookies as described in our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.
You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.
Compact case
Published by: Stanford Business School
Originally published in: 2008
Version: 8 December 2009
Length: 5 pages
Data source: Field research

Abstract

This case describes a number of situations in which important customers of a major electronics manufacturing firm (contract manufacturer) behaved in a manner that could be considered ''ethically challenged.'' The case is told from the perspective of the EMS firm''s CEO, who was personally involved in addressing these issues. Issues with three customers are described. All were a significant portion of the EMS firm''s overall business. In one, a customer misled the EMS firm about its order receipts, leading to the EMS firm acquiring a substantial excess inventory that the customer was contractually required to pay for. The customer threatened to withdraw its future business if forced to make the payment. A second customer, facing a profit shortfall, demanded a payment for a ''warranty problem.'' The EMS firm faced difficulties with a third customer related to a small research and development firm that it purchased at the customer''s request, in order to serve the customer''s engineering needs.

About

Abstract

This case describes a number of situations in which important customers of a major electronics manufacturing firm (contract manufacturer) behaved in a manner that could be considered ''ethically challenged.'' The case is told from the perspective of the EMS firm''s CEO, who was personally involved in addressing these issues. Issues with three customers are described. All were a significant portion of the EMS firm''s overall business. In one, a customer misled the EMS firm about its order receipts, leading to the EMS firm acquiring a substantial excess inventory that the customer was contractually required to pay for. The customer threatened to withdraw its future business if forced to make the payment. A second customer, facing a profit shortfall, demanded a payment for a ''warranty problem.'' The EMS firm faced difficulties with a third customer related to a small research and development firm that it purchased at the customer''s request, in order to serve the customer''s engineering needs.

Settings


Related