Summer Doak
HP’s Secret and Oracle’s New Hire
1. Assuming that Mark Hurd really had (intentionally or unintentionally) falsified some
entries in his expense accounts, was this enough reason for Hewlett-Packard Board of
Directors to fire him? Was it morally wrong for them to fire him? Was it wise?
Whether it was morally or ethically wrong, it states on page 410 that falsifying entries
violated HP’s business ethics standards. Because it violated HP’s standards I think this
was enough reason to fire him, and I do not think that it was morally wrong to do so. Not
only did he violate standards, but he made the company look morally wrong by having a
relationship with another woman outside of his marriage. Page 403 of our text states that
an employee’s main ethical duty is to work toward the goals of the firm and avoid any
activities that might harm these goals. Hurd seemed to have his own goals that had
nothing to do with the company, so I feel that it was wise to fire him. I don’t feel that it
was wise to originally agree to the amount of severance that HP agreed to, but by this
time it was too late.
2. Do you believe that Hurd could not perform his duties with Oracle without violating the
agreement he had with HP? Could Hurd rely on the distinction between skills and
information? Would you agree the agreement was unfair and morally invalid?
I agree that it would be difficult for anyone, especially someone who has already proven
to be morally corrupt, to work for a competitor fulfilling the same position as you
previously had and not rely on some of the things you had learned at your previous job. I
don’t think it would be impossible to rely on skills, the same foundation you began with
before starting any previous job. The skills that landed you the job in the first place, but
in this case I don’t believe Hurd would do so. I think this agreement makes it very hard
for Hurd to find any kind of employment because of the work he did and the business
lines he made, but he did sign the contract which made it feasible for him to potentially
be sued by HP. Fair or not, this was Hurd’s “law of ageny” (page 403) at the time of his
employment with HP.
3. Was it wrong for Hurd to accept the position as President at Oracle? Was it wrong for
Oracle to hire him?
I don’t believe that it was wrong for Hurd to accept the position, I only believe it set
himself up for legal action to be taken against him. But I can’t say that if I were looking
for a job and knew that any job I took was going to open the door for legal suits that I
wouldn’t take one that I knew may provide some backing in such an instance. And it
wasn’t really wrong for Oracle to hire him, he was very knowledgeable and skilled
because he had already once helped HP out. They maybe should have waited until his 12
months were up, but also who’s to say they even knew about this contract.