The fact of the point is she be and misrepresented her company for her own personal gain, no matter how she portrays or expresses the necessity for the product she was (is) selling. She knowingly lied nigh her company, and implied that she had former senior executives of several fortune 100 companys (like Blockbuster and Alamo, to name a few) as consultants on her staff. The answer to the question then becomes quite simply a resounding YES! If we are just to consider what she did, why she did it becomes irrelevant. She lied, excess and simple.
In this situation (and others similar to this one), the end does not warrant the means, especially if it means lying and deceiving the very public (consumer) you are seeking (as a businessperson).

If she truly believed she had a product that was mandatory on the market, one that was specifically sought after, and if she had a encyclopedic business plan, the product then could have (should have) sold itself. express product or service eliminates the need for deception and lies, to the purpose of creating staffs, departments and department supervisors.
In looking at Ms. Baileys actions from a utile perspective (or the theory of utilitarianism), one can only secern that what she did was in fact ok; that what she did is considered justifiable from the business sense, as it is considered the rule rather than the exception in start-up business practices. In fact, in an article written by Jeffrey L. Seglin for the New...If you want to make for a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment