College of Business Administration

GROUP MEMBERS:

Jill Miale
Kim Gowey
Aaron Partch
Tim Linsdau

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

By the use of a stakeholder analysis, we attempted to map the complex moral relationship between power generating companies and the groups affected by their business decisions. We took on the role of Pops Power, modeled after El Paso Corporation in Texas. El Paso is a real company in the energy business. The moral dilemma that our studies focused on was whether or not El Paso should charge California what it wants simply because it can. In light of allegations concerning price manipulation and actual withholding of natural gas from the California market by large energy generators and natural gas suppliers, and a number of investigations underway by state agencies and federal regulatory authorities, we felt there was ample evidence to pursue this issue as we did.

It was our intention to model Pops Power around El Paso and hold a meeting of "top advisors" so the CEO could make a decision on how to approach the company's public relations problem. The premise of the skit is to pick up on the meeting as it is beginning. Our CEO, Aaron Partch called the meeting with his Economic Strategist. This strategist happens to be an extreme utilitarian. Also invited to the meeting was the VP of Public Relations who represented the far left deontologist. The third invitee was the VP of the Legal department who represented a moderate utilitarian. The CEO happens to be a mugwump interested in self-preservation while acting on the benefit of society.

The CEO's immediate concerns lie in avoiding the looming government regulation. His goals include staying on the good side of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. He felt it important to remember our major stakeholders and the differing degrees of power each has. Ultimately he wants to continue to pursue the financial interests of the shareholders and act socially responsible.

The results of this project were as follows. The strategist adopted an economic utilitarian stance in relation to the dilemma. His views included the statement that the company must act on behalf of the shareholders and in doing so act on the behalf of us. He argued that the shareholders have a right to maximize their investments and the employees have a duty to increase wealth for them.

Our token deontologist believes that as members of society, the company needs to improve itself professionally and focus on social responsibility. Individual and organizational commitment to ethical principles is and ongoing and enduring communication process. Her recommendations include pursuing a more reasonable price structure.

Lastly, the legal department who represented a moderate utilitarian view, concerned herself with social responsibility and economic development. She proposed working with California to improve their infrastructure. This is a long run effort directed at ensuring future business. The viability of the company's financial goals can be assured while avoiding regulatory impositions.

In the concluding moments of the meeting, the CEO enacted an Executive decision to impose voluntary price caps on natural gas to California. The basis of this plan includes adopting a cost plus percentage (based on inflationary trends), which will accurately reflect the concern of the company for the long run viability of the nations economy.

Our rationale is rooted in the philosophy that we must act as a socially responsible corporate entity. We must be moral corporate citizens.