More from the Author

• Background Note | HBS Case Collection | August 2020

  A Note on Ethical Analysis

  Nien-he Hsieh

  Citation:

  Hsieh, Nien-he. "A Note on Ethical Analysis." Harvard Business School Background Note 321-038, August 2020.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducators

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | March 2020 (Revised August 2020)

  Culture at Google

  Nien-hê Hsieh, Amy Klopfenstein and Sarah Mehta

  Beginning in 2017, technology (tech) company Google faced a series of employee-relations issues that threatened its unique culture of innovation and open communication. Issues included protests surrounding Google’s contracts with the U.S. government, restrictions of employee speech, mistreatment of contract and temporary workers, allegations of sexual misconduct and gender inequality, and claims of retaliation against labor organizing. While Google employees felt an obligation to dissent against morally questionable practices, embodying the company’s informal motto “don’t be evil,” the company struggled to respond to employees’ concerns while preserving its unique culture.

  Keywords: Human Resources; Employee Relationship Management; Recruitment; Retention; Resignation and Termination; Labor; Working Conditions; Employment; Labor Unions; Wages; Law; Lawsuits and Litigation; Rights; Ethics; Values and Beliefs; Fairness; Organizations; Organizational Culture; Mission and Purpose; Social Psychology; Attitudes; Behavior; Conflict Management; Trust; Motivation and Incentives; Prejudice and Bias; Power and Influence; Technology; Search Technology; Web; Hardware; Society; Social Issues; Culture; Civil Society or Community; Demographics; Diversity; Ethnicity; Gender; Race; Technology Industry; North and Central America; United States; California;

  Citation:

  Hsieh, Nien-hê, Amy Klopfenstein, and Sarah Mehta. "Culture at Google." Harvard Business School Case 320-050, March 2020. (Revised August 2020.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | March 2015 (Revised August 2020)

  Putting the Guiding Principles into Action: Human Rights at Barrick Gold (A)

  Rebecca Henderson and Nien-he Hsieh

  In 2010, Human Rights Watch, a well-regarded international NGO, approached Barrick Gold asserting that members of the company’s security force at the Porgera Gold Mine in Papua New Guinea had on multiple occasions raped women who were trespassing onto the mine’s waste dumps in search of gold. Subsequent investigations identified significant evidence to support the allegations, and the revelations led to broad ranging change at both Porgera and at Barrick more generally. Drawing heavily on the United Nation’s Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (GPs), Barrick not only moved to make efforts to provide restitution to the women involved, but also designed and rolled out a comprehensive set of policies designed to embed the protection of human rights into the entire company. Barrick also played a central role in leading the development of an auditing and verification framework for the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (the VPs), a set of commitments embraced by most of the world’s largest extractive companies. The case provides students with an opportunity to analyze the challenges that arise from operating in environments with weak state institutions; to examine the challenges of implementing voluntary frameworks, such as the GPs or VPs, and their potential as alternatives to state institutions; to learn about the field of business and human rights; and to develop an analytic framework for evaluating the responsibilities of business leaders to society, especially from the perspective of human rights.

  Keywords: human rights; business and society; Rights; Policy; Leading Change; Corporate Social Responsibility and Impact; Business and Government Relations;

  Citation:

  Henderson, Rebecca, and Nien-he Hsieh. "Putting the Guiding Principles into Action: Human Rights at Barrick Gold (A)." Harvard Business School Case 315-108, March 2015. (Revised August 2020.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related