As a public director of a NASDAQ stock exchange listed public corporation, I have seen how quickly the reforms in corporate governance imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act have changed procedures and policies in public corporations. In areas such as transparency of financial records and other financial matters including compensation of top executives and conflict of interest policies affecting both corporate boards of directors and employees of the corporation the reforms of this new federal law have quickly changed corporate practices in (...) many corporations. Many persons who have studied this new law believe that these changes will benefit the public, shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders in the modern corporation by increasing the reputation of these organizations for integrity and transparency. Stock exchanges such as NASDAQ and the New York Stock Exchange now require all listed companies to have (after a transition time) a majority of independent directors on their boards of directors. Only independent directors may serve on the audit, nominating and compensation committees of boards in most cases. Some exceptions are made to these rules for foreign and domestic issues of companies where a majority of the voting power is held by one person. According to Morrison & Foster LLP, Corporate Board Advisory March , 2004, NASDAQ requires that the board of directors of a listed company determine that an independent director does not have a relationship that would “interfere with the exercise of independent judgment” in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. (shrink)

. Whether to use privileged information as a basis for a decision to sell stock is the central issue in thiscase. A conflict between a stockbrokers perceived obligations to maximize clients stock values and protect their investments (fiduciary responsibility) and violating Security and Exchange Commission insider trading regulations must be resolved.

.Whether to use privileged information as a basis for a decision to sell stock is the central issue in this␣case. A conflict between a stockbroker’s perceived obligations to maximize clients stock values and protect their investments and violating Security and Exchange Commission insider trading regulations must be resolved.

Since the attack on the World Trade Center in New York, and on the Pentagon in the United States, concerns over security issues have been at an all-time high in this country. Both state and federal governments continue to discuss legislation on these issues amid much controversy. One key concern of both employers and employees is the extent that employers, espousing a "need to know" mentality, continue to expand their capability and implementation of surveillance of employees in the workplace. With (...) the technology typically growing faster than the speed of legislation, protective or permissive, the management and legal issues involved in electronic monitoring of employee communications in the workplace, are and well should be on the agenda for discussion of every management and legal team in American business today. Companies have a legitimate right to protect their trade secrets from disclosure by disgruntled employees. Similarly, companies also have a duty to protect their good names and reputations from unauthorized employee communications with outside parties, and even other employees, that may damage them. It is also a prime duty of management to ensure, in their direction of their workforces, that the employees execute their responsibilities by working full time on their stated objectives. In this regard, any management that fails to oversee its workforce to ensure that employees are not expending valuable company time, for which they are being compensated, on personal business, including unauthorized communications, is remiss in its responsibilities to its shareholders. The company may see a reduction of the price of its shares in the marketplace if it does not protect the economic interests of its shareholders. (shrink)

This case study chronicles the entrepreneurial and real estate investment activities of a recent Ph.D. graduate in business administration. The protagonist learns that clear focus is necessary for entrepreneurial success and that trust does not mix with entrepreneurship and negotiation. Ethics are sometimes problematic for entrepreneurs.

This case involves the quandary of a businessman named Arthur Eldredge. A member of the Board of Trustees of Plum Valley Hospital, he is uneasy about apparent conflicts of interest among many board members. Further, Mr. Eldredge is unsure if he can fulfill his responsibilities to the Board. As a trustee of the hospital, he thinks he should do something about these issues: and he is uncertain about what action to take.

This case involves the quandary of a businessman named Arthur Eldredge. A member of the Board of Trustees of Plum Valley Hospital, he is uneasy about apparent conflicts of interest among many board members. Further, Mr. Eldredge is unsure if he can fulfill his responsibilities to the Board. A trustee of the hospital, he thinks he should do something to resolve these issues. He is uncertain about what action to take.