Controversial topics in Business

[LadyLuna]

For one of my classes, I'm supposed to write about a controversial topic in business. While I can (and will) do the research, my problem is I'm not always aware when there is an actual controversy around the topic. I tend to not notice the controversy aspect. Or think that something's controversial when really most everyone has the same idea about it.

So! I'd love your help. The paper requires that it be about something within the past year. The suggestions seem like things I was hearing about when I first went to college, which was at least four years ago, but then again, it's very possible those controversies are still going on.

What controversies currently face the business world?

I'd like to get the topic nailed down by Thanksgiving so I can get cracking on the research and writing.

 

[schlmoe]

I have one for you: How companies handle PII (Personally Identifiable Information) and/or Privacy in general to protect their Customers.

There are a myriad of Federal regulations that purport to do this: Some of these regulations are wide encompassing, but here we are only concerned with the sections that deal in personal privacy.

HIPAA: to maintain patient privacy
SOX (or Sarbanes Oxley): to maintain IT controls to prevent fraud (includes controls on databases which could contain PII)
GLB (or Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act): to maintain consumer privacy in financial transactions
FFIEC (or Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council): more on consumer privacy in financial transactions

There are many, many more. You could read about them here: http://www.bbbonline.org/understandingp ... ivlaws.pdf

In my experience, most companies are re-active rather than pro-active. Meaning that not much attention is given until a data leak or data exposure occurs. And I'm here to tell you that most of these situations occur due to negligence: running out of date or unpatched S/W; little or no access control (internet connected database open to the world); poor IT controls (Customer list on an unencrypted device which is lost/stolen); etc. You read (or could read) about these exposures all the time. That's the problem, they happen all the time.

There is a war going on right now. I'm not talking about hackers vs. businesses or hackers vs. us, yeah that's happening. What I'm talking about is the war between businesses and US. The United States, which means us. It's being fought by lawyers and lobbyists on Wall Street and Capital Hill. The businesses who are still making hundreds of billions and handing out billions in bonuses are telling Congress it's too hard, it's too expensive. Sorry, I got a little off track.

To make it easy for you, reach for the low hanging fruit: Google, FaceBook, any one of the major credit reporting agencies. Start off by writing them a letter asking how they comply with XXX regulation, see what they say. Then compare that to their official privacy policy AND the Federal/State regulation in question.

Have fun!

 

[harry]

... my problem is I'm not always aware when there is an actual controversy around the topic. I tend to not notice the controversy aspect. Or think that something's controversial when really most everyone has the same idea about it.

...The paper requires that it be about something within the past year. The suggestions seem like things I was hearing about when I first went to college, which was at least four years ago, but then again, it's very possible those controversies are still going on.

What controversies currently face the business world?

The first point is interesting. I think controversy tends to be eliminated from the business sphere by being taught as doctrine (e.g. an MBA), and enforced by legislation and regulation (maximise shareholder value etc). So controversy tends to focus on those areas or in subsequent litigation over them e.g. US mortgage defaults and securitisation.

To my mind, the biggest controversy in business post-credit crisis is the regulation of accounting standards. E.g. off-balance sheet vehicles, off-shore accounting for tax minimisation, or more fundamental still, the evaluation of assets, i.e. 'mark to market' doctrine overturned in 2009 in favour of more flexible 'fair value' standards (which are handy when your assets would turn out to be toxic to the balance sheet if ever marked-to-market).

These touch on almost everything, e.g. BIS/Basel III regulation of banking capital requirements, credit-ratings & agency standards, the sovereign debt crisis in Europe. Fair Value rules also relate to the 'business cycle', a fundamental concept.

One good place for an irreverent overview of particular episodes and reference to some first-class sources (e.g. BIS papers) is FT Alphaville, see mark-to-market and accounting tags

I like them for odd stories like this one-man protest in favour of mark to market accounting: Anarchists at the gates and Someone should give this daring protestor a new job, which they picked up in Finance’s last stand :lol:

'business controversy OR controversial' on Google News turned up SOPA (Stop Internet Piracy Act). That could be a rich topic given the conflicting commercial interests, the implications for consumer and individual rights and the international dimensions (China & WTO) etc.

 

[ViruSphere]

Truth in advertising. It's illegal to outright lie and make false claims about a product or service, what about claims that stretch the truth, mislead or confuse?

Examples:

- Are foods labelled "low fat" or "fat free" healthier for you?
- Why are fast food restaurants allowed to make ads with perfect looking hamburgers and sandwiches, when the burger/sandwich you receive at the restaurant never looks like that?
- When a car company says that their car is "best in class", what is that supposed to mean?
- What % of "real fruit juice" does a bottle of fruit juice have to contain for a company to legally put "contains real fruit juice" on a bottle? On that same note, does a bottle of say grape juice have to contain real grape juice?
- On television ads promoting pharmaceutical products with doctors, dentists and pharmacists, should the company be allowed to use actors pretending to be these people?
- Should infomercials with poor quality products and outlandish claims who's main object is to sucker some dumb person out of his/her money be legally allowed to exist?

 

[schlmoe]

I think LadyLuna has some good choices for her paper. Thanks to Harry and Viru for posting their suggestions. Anything related to keeping Wall Street in check and "truth in advertising" will always have my vote!

 

[bodisha]

i'd suggest the congressional super committee and how Congress remained deadlocked over debt and taxes... first there was the government shutdown threat in the spring.... and if the super committee can't figure out how to balance the budget $1.2 trillion dollars will automatically be cut from the budget

 

[schlmoe]

i'd suggest the congressional super committee and how Congress remained deadlocked over debt and taxes... first there was the government shutdown threat in the spring.... and if the super committee can't figure out how to balance the budget $1.2 trillion dollars will automatically be cut from the budget

That's an excellent topic for discussion, but I believe her paper's subject is to feature commercial entities.

 

[ViruSphere]

It's funny in that I went to school for Advertising and Marketing. I have no problem with promoting products, but I have a strong sense of right and wrong and my conscience won't allow me to be that sleazy, slimy manipulative sales guy.

 

[bodisha]

i'd suggest the congressional super committee and how Congress remained deadlocked over debt and taxes... first there was the government shutdown threat in the spring.... and if the super committee can't figure out how to balance the budget $1.2 trillion dollars will automatically be cut from the budget

That's an excellent topic for discussion, but I believe her paper's subject is to feature commercial entities.

I'd say that slashing $1.2 trillion dollars from the budget would affect commercial business... While the vast majority of that money would probably most directly affect social services and the military... commercial business feeds the federal government with technology and supplies... Here is a list of the top 10 commercial contractors to the U.S. Federal government

LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION
THE BOEING COMPANY
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION
RAYTHEON COMPANY
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
L-3 COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS, INC.
SAIC, INC.
BAE SYSTEMS PLC
HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES, INC.

 

[bodisha]

I have one for you: How companies handle PII (Personally Identifiable Information) and/or Privacy in general to protect their Customers.

There are a myriad of Federal regulations that purport to do this: Some of these regulations are wide encompassing, but here we are only concerned with the sections that deal in personal privacy.

HIPAA: to maintain patient privacy
SOX (or Sarbanes Oxley): to maintain IT controls to prevent fraud (includes controls on databases which could contain PII)
GLB (or Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act): to maintain consumer privacy in financial transactions
FFIEC (or Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council): more on consumer privacy in financial transactions

There are many, many more. You could read about them here: http://www.bbbonline.org/understandingp ... ivlaws.pdf

In my experience, most companies are re-active rather than pro-active. Meaning that not much attention is given until a data leak or data exposure occurs. And I'm here to tell you that most of these situations occur due to negligence: running out of date or unpatched S/W; little or no access control (internet connected database open to the world); poor IT controls (Customer list on an unencrypted device which is lost/stolen); etc. You read (or could read) about these exposures all the time. That's the problem, they happen all the time.

There is a war going on right now. I'm not talking about hackers vs. businesses or hackers vs. us, yeah that's happening. What I'm talking about is the war between businesses and US. The United States, which means us. It's being fought by lawyers and lobbyists on Wall Street and Capital Hill. The businesses who are still making hundreds of billions and handing out billions in bonuses are telling Congress it's too hard, it's too expensive. Sorry, I got a little off track.

To make it easy for you, reach for the low hanging fruit: Google, FaceBook, any one of the major credit reporting agencies. Start off by writing them a letter asking how they comply with XXX regulation, see what they say. Then compare that to their official privacy policy AND the Federal/State regulation in question.

Have fun!

Having worked in IT security and dealt directly with SOX & PCI compliance standards... I can say there's a well known and ongoing issue within the IT Security industry that many times management focuses attention on staying compliant with the governing bodies that monitor them and not focusing on actually securing a network

While these compliance standards do a lot towards securing a network... they still have gaps, and holes in them... and management will only spend budget money on the technology and resources that will apply towards compliance standards and aren't closing off remaining security holes that aren't directly relating to staying complaint

 

[schlmoe]

I'd say that slashing $1.2 trillion dollars from the budget would affect commercial business... While the vast majority of that money would probably most directly affect social services and the military... commercial business feeds the federal government with technology and supplies... Here is a list of the top 10 commercial contractors to the U.S. Federal government

Not that I'm looking for an argument, but the paper's topic is "a controversial topic in business". While the proposed budget cuts would affect many businesses, the "controversy" does not come from the businesses themselves.

Again, the Congressional Super Committee is an important topic and deserves our attention, IMO it would not be a valid topic for the paper that LadyLuna described.

 

[schlmoe]

Having worked in IT security and dealt directly with SOX & PCI compliance standards... I can say there's a well known and ongoing issue within the IT Security industry that many times poor management focuses attention on staying compliant with the governing bodies that monitor them and not focusing on actually securing a network

While these compliance standards do a lot towards securing a network... they still have gaps, and holes in them... and poor management will only spend budget money on the technology and resources that will apply towards compliance standards and aren't closing off remaining security holes that aren't directly relating to staying complaint

Fixed!

 

[LadyLuna]

So, the two topics I see are:

How do companies handle the personal data they acquire?

and

How do companies handle their accounting standards?

Are those actually controversies that people are debating? Or is that just research into how business work?

 

[ViruSphere]

Out of the two, I'd go with personal data. In today's economic world where everyone's trying to make as much money as possible, behind the scenes personal information databases can and are sold from company to company. It becomes a battle of whether to keep personal information private and keep the trust of your customers vs. making extra money. This decision becomes even more difficult when a company is struggling to stay in business and the money obtained from selling personal information could make the difference between staying in business and going under.

 

[ViruSphere]

So Luna, what topic did you end up deciding on?

 

[LadyLuna]

x.x I didn't.

Due to illness a week and a half ago, finances got so tight it was a choice between failing classes and getting kicked out of the apartment.

I pulled out of classes just this morning.

 

[ViruSphere]

Ouch, that sucks. Hopefully you'll get going again soon. I'm pulling for ya. :mrgreen: