What liability did Alam breach?
Alam as the departmental manager in Chong’s business is obliged to the business through the agency relationship. Alam in his acts did not act in good faith in his operations he, therefore, breached the duty of care and that of loyalty as demanded by the principles of agency. Agency demands that he acts for the agent and as per the agent’s orders (Johannes & Tony 2004). The breach is further witnessed when Alam accepts to take a bribe in form of money from customers as indicated in the agency case that involves him with his father-in-law; this is against Chong’s business as his principal.
Punishment for breach of agreement demands that punishment do not be administered beyond what the breaching party agreed to offer hence the resulting damages against Alam ought to be within his contractual agreement with the employer Chong. Chong is therefore liable to provide damages of which Chong’s business is entitled to the damages. The companies brand and image are vastly affected which is likely to affect its operations in form of the costs that the business would incur when trying to construct the image of the business. The company, therefore, has the obligation of trying to cover up the happenings so that they don’t continue spreading like bushfire. The punishment to Alam would be administered in court since the relationship was contractual.
This is because acts of bribery are against ethics codes as per jaxtra’s codes of ethics, they represent a bad image of the business’s operations with its clients. Chong himself as the principal does not have the moral obligation to administer direct punishment to Alam since he is not privy to so much information with regards to Alam’s acts and unethical conduct.
What should be done to Alam?
Alam and Chong by getting into a contract bound themselves according to the principles of contract (Paul & Richard 2001). According to the principles of agency this scenario presents an enforceable contract, the acts of Alam have highly constituted a breach of the contract and the plaintiff has as a result experienced damages due to the breach of the defendant, Alam. Alam as the manager of Chong’s business is obligated to act in the good faith to Chong and his business.
By being disloyal Alam has breached the element of obligation which requires that he becomes loyal in act and responsibility for his principal. By accepting bribes he has gone against the element of performance that demands he takes the action of his legal responsibilities and obligations. As a result of all the above irresponsible and unethical acts, the business has lost much time trying to keep up to the standards of operations set from the start.
Chong is therefore entitled to damages from Alam as shall be provided for by the courts of law. The procedure for achieving this is to take Alam to the courts so that the courts can process the damages through quantifications of the alleged damages. The evidence that there is a breach is quite clear for Chong since there is a record of bribery. Alam’s employment should also be terminated forthwith pending investigation; every active stakeholder of the business should be warned of making any unnecessary comments as the matter is in courts. From both internal and external sources the evidence to prove the case is quite open.
Can Chong find evidence for blaming Alam for what he breached?
For sure Chong needs a lot of proof to win his case against Alam, their relationship is legal and Chong simply needs to prove that Alam’s acts that harmed the business are legally enforceable hence safe to suit. Chong must also prove that Alam committed the breach and that there is no doubt that they did just that. The damages that are suffered by Chong and his business must be directly linked to the business in terms of its effects. To win blame on Alam, Chong has to look for and authenticate his witnesses and load them with a lot of proof. Chong needs to prove his claims before the courts basing first on the rumors going around the organization.
He may retrieve his evidence from both within the organization as well as without or externally. Internally, he is likely to use his employees as witnesses; they are the best, cheap, and very easy to access. They are likely to have the most accurate and authentic information which would win him the case if they are in his favor.
This only has one major setback which is also simply appropriate when Alam will be expected to continue working for Chong after the case since the relationship with the other employees shall have been eroded. External sources are not so valid but they can be used with information that they can provide the required evidence. This option can be solved with great caution since it is likely to taint the image and brand of the company if pursued wrongly. From the clients, Chong would be in the position to prove that Alam received the bribe.
How can Chong expand the business?
Several expansion strategies can be used by any form of business to expand its operations. For Chong’s case, he should in the first case consider the mayor’s offer if it does not contain any elements of corruption. This is a way through which Chong will be in the position of gaining the accessibility of both workforce and customers for their products. These are very critical elements of expansion and growth.
Undertaking this project offers benefits to several people since the flyover will bust movement and accessibility of the town. Chong will benefit from increased turnover since the transportation of goods to the market and materials to the company is increased severely. Chong should engage in such a project but after analyzing the costs and compared to returns see whether it is viable (Brian & Williams 1987).
As a means to achieve growth, Chong can brand the mayor’s project as a CSR activity. This facilitates a good rapport with the community who provides a lot of resources to the business. Jextra’s Ethics code also demands that businesses are responsible for all its stakeholders and as well are sensitive to the environment. The costs of the projects by the mayor only involve constructing a flyover then a school. The benefits are the market created, labor force attracted, and time-saving by the workforce as they arrive to work (Asbjan & Rosado 1995). Though some elements of nepotism by the mayor are detected in form of favoring his sister, this is not much grand corruption and can be ignored since it does not affect the costs by inflating them.
Works Cited
Brian and Williams. Business Process Modeling Improves Administrative Control, 3rd ed. 1984. Britain: Bristarn University Press, 1987. Print.
Johannes and Tony. The Evaluation of Business Process Modeling Techniques, 4th ed. 2000.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.
Asbjan and Rosado. Business management process, 6th ed. 1989. London: Oxford University Press, 1995. Print.
Paul and Richard. Performance management in business process, 2nd ed. 1999. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2001. Print.