1. What does the case suggest is the value of ethical behavior? What did Siemens gain by introducing controls to minimize the likelihood of corruption?

2. Most countries lack adequate laws or enforcement to deal with bribery and other forms of corruption. Why is this? How do countries benefit from a strong rule of law that minimizes corruption?

3. Do you think Siemens was penalized enough for its corruption? Why or why not? What can governments or other organizations do to discourage firms and others from engaging in corrupt behavior?

4. Some argue that because ethical standards are lax in many countries, Siemens and other firms must pay bribes to obtain new business. Do you agree with this view? Stated differently, when doing business around the world, is it generally better to emphasize normativism or relativism? Justify your answer.

One day in 2004, a senior executive at Siemens Company said he received a disturbing phone call from a Saudi Arabian businessman. The caller said he represented a Saudi consulting firm that had been a business partner of Siemens. He wanted $910 million in U.S. currency in payments and if Siemens didn’t pay up, he would forward documents to government authorities detailing bribes paid on Siemens’ behalf to win telecommunications contracts in Saudi Arabia. The incident was the beginning of a series of events—police raids, forensic investigations, and arrests of top executives—that became one of the biggest corruption cases in corporate history.