Friday, August 23, 2013

Reflection – The Hershey’s and Shell Cases


The Hershey’s and Shell cases bring to light the responsibility of corporations for the effects of their operations. It is important to note that in the Hershey’s case, the company was entirely unaware of the problems which the general public pointed out in the first place. As far as the company was concerned, they purchased their cocoa through valid and legal means. What they failed to account for was the fact that the manner by which the cocoa was being harvested was anything but valid and legal back at home.

On the other hand, Shell knew all along that it was propagating a world of conflict and suffering around its Nigerian refineries. The general public was well aware of this. Unfortunately, it was just the general public of Nigeria. The world’s thirst of crude oil has effectively granted Shell a veritable cloak of immunity. After all, wars have been waged for black gold. Suffering and death for the sake of crude oil is anything but new to the rest of the world.

If anything, these cases allowed me glimpse at the real nature of the power that big businesses hold. Shell is blatantly violating entire bodies of law as is where is and is still let off scot free by essentially the whole world.

The idea is mind boggling for me as my experience as a law student has taught me that even the richest, most powerful individuals can be made to bow before the will of justice through law. And indeed this has happened time and again. Nations have been liberated as mass murderers and genocidal dictators have been subdued by international law. And yet here the world allows a mere multinational company to have death and suffering as part of its daily operations list.

If the courts cannot bring justice to the people of Nigeria or other people oppressed by commercial companies, who will? From the onset, there appear to be innumerable issues on hand. International, local, and even trade nuances for that matter.

In my opinion, the problem really started with the decision makers of Shell. At one point in time, they had the call on what to do given the socio-political plight of Nigeria. They could have as easily done something else rather than simply play along. Logically, they followed the path of least resistance. They get their profits for the least effort exerted. They did not dodge the bullet. They just pushed someone else in to get shot. This was sadly and literally the case.

Hershey’s could have easily done the same thing and turned a blind eye to the cacao farmers and a deaf ear to the protesters. What they did was actually surprising for such a large company. Hershey’s could have used its army of lawyers to do legal acrobatics for it or simply abandon these cacao suppliers. They did neither. They actually listened and decided to help out.


Whether or not the decision makers of Hershey’s did what they did because the world hungers not for chocolate as much as crude oil, we will never know. What we do know is that they took a look at the problem and did what they did best – make business decisions. So they did the math, worked the logistics, and essentially, did the right thing.

Reflection – The Hershey’s and Shell Cases


The Hershey’s and Shell cases bring to light the responsibility of corporations for the effects of their operations. It is important to note that in the Hershey’s case, the company was entirely unaware of the problems which the general public pointed out in the first place. As far as the company was concerned, they purchased their cocoa through valid and legal means. What they failed to account for was the fact that the manner by which the cocoa was being harvested was anything but valid and legal back at home.

On the other hand, Shell knew all along that it was propagating a world of conflict and suffering around its Nigerian refineries. The general public was well aware of this. Unfortunately, it was just the general public of Nigeria. The world’s thirst of crude oil has effectively granted Shell a veritable cloak of immunity. After all, wars have been waged for black gold. Suffering and death for the sake of crude oil is anything but new to the rest of the world.

If anything, these cases allowed me glimpse at the real nature of the power that big businesses hold. Shell is blatantly violating entire bodies of law as is where is and is still let off scot free by essentially the whole world.

The idea is mind boggling for me as my experience as a law student has taught me that even the richest, most powerful individuals can be made to bow before the will of justice through law. And indeed this has happened time and again. Nations have been liberated as mass murderers and genocidal dictators have been subdued by international law. And yet here the world allows a mere multinational company to have death and suffering as part of its daily operations list.

If the courts cannot bring justice to the people of Nigeria or other people oppressed by commercial companies, who will? From the onset, there appear to be innumerable issues on hand. International, local, and even trade nuances for that matter.

In my opinion, the problem really started with the decision makers of Shell. At one point in time, they had the call on what to do given the socio-political plight of Nigeria. They could have as easily done something else rather than simply play along. Logically, they followed the path of least resistance. They get their profits for the least effort exerted. They did not dodge the bullet. They just pushed someone else in to get shot. This was sadly and literally the case.

Hershey’s could have easily done the same thing and turned a blind eye to the cacao farmers and a deaf ear to the protesters. What they did was actually surprising for such a large company. Hershey’s could have used its army of lawyers to do legal acrobatics for it or simply abandon these cacao suppliers. They did neither. They actually listened and decided to help out.


Whether or not the decision makers of Hershey’s did what they did because the world hungers not for chocolate as much as crude oil, we will never know. What we do know is that they took a look at the problem and did what they did best – make business decisions. So they did the math, worked the logistics, and essentially, did the right thing.

Reflection – The Ford Motor Car Case


As a law student, cases hold a very special place in my heart. Cases allows one to see how even the most theoretical or nebulous concepts in law are applied in real life. This is because the cases are actually transcripts which altered the fates and sometimes fortunes of real individual human beings. This idea made me particularly excited to learn that we would be using case studies in MBA classes as well.

The first MBA case for the CSR class was the Ford Motor Car case. For me, it is a significant change of pace from the usual legal cases I read. This is because any answer one produces is deemed a valid answer. This is subject to qualifications, however. The answers are backed with reasonable presumptions and conclusions in light of the facts provided.

With this in mind, however, it became clear to me that this is a “real life” case and not one whose answer can be dug up from the pages of a legal code or textbook. There would be limitless possibilities. Luckily, the class also taught us how to produce Alternative Courses of Action. This procedure provides a system by which one can quantify the best possible solution given one’s priorities in the situation. The issue now becomes a question of what one’s priorities really are. Unfortunately for the victims in the case, the Ford executives prioritized profit over the safety of their customers.

The case also struck me in the sense that in spite of literally putting other people’s lives at risk for the sake of making a quick buck, the Ford executives were actually operating within the bounds of law – American or International. This realization bothered me a little. It highlighted to me a role of business leaders in society. As with law, knowledge and skill in business is highly potent but morally neutral. Whether such knowledge and skill will be for the benefit or detriment of other people is left entirely to the will of the lawyer or business leader.

In spite of this similarity, however, the legal profession differs as it is adversarial by nature. At worst, lawyers can only force a compromise between two parties. Even then, lawyers really only serve one party at a time in any given case – never both sides. In short, as far as lawyers are concerned, the only stakeholder is their client and that they must win.

On the other hand, business leaders are expected to make decisions which would make the company profitable as well as sustainable. In making these decisions, business leaders must take into account not only how to make money through the products or services of their business but also the effect of these products or services upon the end users. It is of note that these two parties are normally at opposing ends in legal cases. I strongly believe that short of an actual violation of rights, this should not be the case. The business must exist to serve a particular need of the customer. The latter must be seen as a partner on the road to prosperity and not a mere cash cow to coax money out of.

Relating back to the Ford Case, the executives perceived their customers as cash cows. For the sake of profit, they gambled on the odds of the survival of their customers in case their cars got involved in an accident.


Thursday, July 11, 2013

Reflection - Pat Gelsinger Lecture

When I was made to transfer from Ateneo Law, I was unable to stand being idle at home. I felt that my time, effort, and potential was being wasted by me just lounging around at our house while still being undecided on what to do with my life. At the same time, I observed that my father was continuously bogged down by matters incidental to actual decisions to be made or work to be done for our business. It was at this juncture that I decided to volunteer to formally work for our business and at least attempt to apply what I had learned in college and what little I have so far from law school. Ultimately, my goal was to at least put myself on the front lines so that my dad would not have to spend so much time letting incidental decisions get in the way of bigger business decisions.

During this span of time, one of the lessons I picked up on quickly was my father’s initial inability to simply take a break. Back then, we would arrive at the office in the morning at around 9am and leave at 7pm or at times, even later. This schedule would be fairly tolerable for someone in peak physical condition, but be that as it may, my father is not that young anymore. In addition to doing what I could to help out, I decided to be more active in telling him to simply stay home when sick, sleep earlier, and even stay at home during weekends when possible. I still do these activities, but at a lesser extent as my dad now incorporates taking breaks from work into his daily activities.

It is at this point that I can relate with Pat Gelsinger’s lecture. In Pat’s lecture, he narrated how he was a totally different person depending on which day of the week it was and how he had a literal hell of a time “balancing” his different personalities. Specifically, Pat had a hard time picking between his family and professional responsibilities. In the end, he decided to put his foot down and decide in favor of his family.

From a manager’s perspective, this may pose a risk. Productivity may suffer if a key employee decides to now show up for work in order to keep his or her promise to his or her family. More relevantly, from a manager/proprietor’s perspective, even more productivity may be lost if one decides to go out with one’s family instead of accomplishing even more work or making more decisions that the staff would be able to get things done.

I believe a little or a reasonable reduction in productive time is good and worthy sacrifice. In my opinion, what is important is to keep the enterprise running and to have it running well. In light of this, a business cannot run well with people who are run ragged by their work. This lesson is true for all the ranks within the business. It matters for the employees and the staff who do the actual field work but it matters even more for the managers and the business owners upon whose decisions depend the very direction and potential success of the enterprise.

In conclusion, Pat’s lecture managed to summarize what I was attempting to reconcile with my dad some time ago. Thankfully, however, he too realized this on his admission that his body may not be able to take the same amount of punishment that it once had.


On my end, though, work, life, and school are all very closely intertwined. I hope to be able to find an analogous solution for myself that I don’t run myself ragged over the course of my life as well as my career.

BUS560M Reflection–The Life of St. John Baptist De La Salle and Lasallian Leadership Values

The first time I have ever heard of St. John Baptist De La Salle was when I was a first grade student in De La Salle Zobel. We were made to watch a film about his life. In all reality, most of it was lost to my memory as a child. I was unable to see what the big deal was about education being given to all children who wanted to learn. Neither could I see the fuss about having a class full of such children being taught by just one volunteer teacher. In the end, all I ever really remembered, for the sake of a good grade, at that, was that St. John Baptist De La Salle was a French teacher who came from a rich family and was very devoted to his students and his fellow teachers.

In retrospect, much of the story and significance of Lasallian education was lost to my (probably still) short attention span. For the longest time, I have never really appreciated the values being imbued upon us when I was in grade school and high school. Christian Living and most other lessons about the Saint La Salle took a back seat in favor of learning more about Science, Mathematics, Literature, and History – the more “concrete” subjects. Neither did it help that upon graduating high school, I enrolled in Ateneo de Manila University. The school notably has a different patron saint and a significantly different patron saint – Saint Ignatius of Loyola. Of course, even this was of little consequence to me as I was again too busy with activities beyond the realm of reflecting on the significance of the school patron saint.

After a variety of experiences thus far, I now find myself in this situation where I must indeed reflect upon the significance of the school patron saint. It is not that I find anything wrong or oppressive about the activity. It is simply the fact that I truly never relegated much thought to doing so. In any case, what really struck me were the respective histories of the two patron saints that I have encountered in my formal education.

While both of the saints were very dedicated leaders, standing resolute and unyielding in the pursuit of their goals, their attitudes in general were polarized. Saint Ignatius was a soldier. As such, the religious order (and consequentially the schools set up and managed by them) which he established espoused a fierce and steadfast drive to accomplishing their duties and in giving above and beyond their capabilities to become the very best of the best as if to mimic the martial nature of the saint himself. The culture of the Jesuit order and the schools they founded possess an esprit de corps of that of a dedicated military unit. This has its good and bad points. But as a fan of military history, I related very easily to this.

On the other hand, we have Saint Lasalle. He, in my opinion, is the Yin to the Yang of Saint Ignatius. Although also resolute and dedicated to his calling, Saint Lasalle was the quiet kind of leader. He still led by example, but he did so in a way that would set the trend for all educators succeeding him for centuries to come. He was patient as he was stubborn in spite of all the difficulties he faced, physically or otherwise. Saint Lasalle sought to establish a religious and educational program significantly ahead of its time by attempting to give education to all who wanted to be educated no matter the cost to himself. The grittiness of the film highlighted this. From the scenes of pre-revolution France illustrated the deep divide between the classes if only to further emphasize the gambit Saint Lasalle deemed worthy of his time and effort.

Exactly how devoted he was and to what lengths he went to for his cause was lost to me as a child. Roughly a decade and a half later and after watching the movie again, I finally understand what all the talk about Saint Lasalle being a risk-taker, an innovator, a servant-leader, and a mentor is all about.

Pre-revolution France had a significant divide between the rights and privileges of the upper, middle, and lower classes. For example, only the rich were able to afford quality education. This alone positions them to be the only people able to properly qualify for higher-paying or society-changing professions. Big picture wise, this means that the rich will keep getting richer and the poor will either remain there or just become even poorer. By establishing an educational system which favors all who seek to be educated regardless of their backgrounds, Saint Lasalle effectively went against the status quo of his time. Simply put, it was revolutionary. The stranglehold upon education can now be effectively removed should his plan prosper. Saint Lasalle was an innovator.

Of course, such innovation does not come without personal cost. Saint Lasalle came from a rich family – a noble background. Their society described earlier, the man could have lived rich and easy for the rest of his life. In spite of that, however, he chose to give up his ticket to easy street in favor of a noble cause – to educate the poor.

In pursuing his cause, Saint Lasalle proved himself to be a servant-leader and a mentor. I honestly believe that you cannot be an effective leader, or even considered to be a leader if you were incapable of being both a servant-leader and a mentor. Saint Lasalle was a hands-on leader. He preferred to be on the figurative front lines of his activities in lieu of merely dishing out orders to his subordinates. He personally attended to the needs of his associates insofar as taking care of material needs such as lodging and moral needs such as personal welfare. By always being on the business end of things and by being truly immersed in the welfare of his associates while still providing them direction during trying times, Saint Lasalle proved to be a mentor as well.

In the end, being able to properly reflect on the life of Saint Lasalle after such a long time has enlightened me as to what it really means to be a Lasallian Business Leader. It is not merely a buzzword I can throw around to new students or what not, I can now feel what it means to be patient and understanding while still being able to be resolute and resilient in the pursuit of a good cause.

Of course, our cause now extends beyond educating the poor. As Lasallian business leaders, we must be able to maximize not only our own potentials as professionals, but to also bear in mind the values of being Lasallian leaders – to be innovators, risk-takers (within reason, in my opinion), servant-leaders, and ultimately, mentors. I believe that we must not forget these because money and power will only serve to amplify what sort of persons we are at heart. To fail in the core aspects will mean failure in all other aspects.

Addendum:
It feels refreshing to be able to pray the Lasallian prayer with conviction this time around.