Discussion: Borland Case Baseline Ethics

Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria for earning your grade.
Read 5.1: An Ethics framework from Chapter 5 of the Human Relations OER textbook.
Read Borland’s Brave Beginning.
Navigate to the threaded discussion and respond to the following prompts:
Briefly summarize the Borland Case.
Clearly identify and discuss each of the Four Levels of Ethical Issues from your reading in the Human Relations text that are present in the Borland case.
In your analysis, be sure to discuss how the players, in this case, were impacted at each of the four levels.
What do you think about Kahn’s actions? Do his actions amount to shrewd business, deception, or both?
Some might argue that since everyone “won” in the end, Kahn’s decision was ethical. Do you agree? Why or why not?
Review the Ted Talk Our Buggy Moral Code. What is a personal fudge factor? Does Kahn’s actions in the Borland case violate your personal fudge factor? Why or Why not?
If you were Kahn, what might have been some ways to achieve the same outcome but in a more ethical manner? How do these approaches take into account the four levels of ethical issues from your reading?
Each response should contain a detailed evaluation that demonstrates clear, insightful critical thinking
Guidelines:
Your 1.3 post should be at least 500 words in length
Your 1.3 post must include two scholarly sources that are properly cited according to APA guidelines. For questions on APA style, go to OCLS APA Writing Styles Guide.
Your 1.3 post is due by the end of Workshop One.
Be prepared in Workshop Two to engage in discussion regarding your initial post. You will compose two replies to separate student’s posts as rebuttals to their arguments. Then, in Workshop Three, you will need to compose a final rebuttal to a student who made a reply on your initial post.
ethics
ATTACHED FILE(S)

Getting Started
Someone with a degree in education, business, medicine,
psychology, or law, can be familiar with the knowledge base of the
profession, but may still act in a manner that is unethical and
undermines the utility of that knowledge. It is important to learn
the skill of ethical reasoning in addition to ethical principles. In this
activity, you will being to examine situations that may or may not
be ethical and evaluate the players and outcomes that occur
because of chosen actions.
Upon successful completion of this discussion, you will be
able to:
● Define ethics and give examples of ethical decisions you
make in your daily life.
● Explain the levels of ethics and how they relate to human
relations.
● Explain how your ethics are developed both personally and in
the workplace.
● Examine the guidelines offered by the world and the Bible for
ethical living.
● Distinguish behavior accepted by those serving the world
from behavior by those serving Christ.

Resources
● OER Text: ​Human Relations
● Video: Our Buggy Moral Code

Background Information
Borland’s Brave Beginning
Philipe Kahn, the colorful former CEO and current Chairman of
Borland International built a powerful software company from the
ground up with a series of brilliant business moves including the
1991 acquisition of Ashton-Tate, one of the software industries’
biggest companies for $440 million. Until very recently, the
company was extremely successful, culminating in the building a
palatial headquarters complex costing nearly $100 million. At one
point, Kahn even entertained thoughts of challenging Microsoft as
the world’s top software manufacturer. (1) While the company has
recently fallen on hard times, its beginning is one that some would
consider morally questionable while others would denote as being
“smart moves within the game.”
In an interview with Inc. Magazine in 1989, Kahn told the story of
Borland’s humble beginnings. Operating out of two small rooms
and strapped for cash, he couldn’t afford to place an ad in ​Byte
magazine, the best forum to reach his target market. In order to
convince the ad salesman to extend credit terms, Kahn hired
“extra people” to scurry around and made sure the phones were
ringing in order to look busy. He prepared a media plan on a chart
in which ​Byte​ was crossed out but made sure the salesman
“accidentally” saw the chart. When the salesman asked if they
wanted to advertise in Byte, Kahn replied that it was not the right
audience and that they couldn’t afford it. The salesman pleaded
and eventually gave good terms of credit.The ad ran once and
sold $150,000 worth of software, launching a successful
venture.(2)
1. Pitta, Julie. “The Barbarian Steps Down.”Los Angeles Times.
January 12, 1995. p. D1+
2. “Managing by Necessity.”Inc.March, 1989, pp. 33+

Instructions
1. Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria
for earning your grade.
2. Read ​5.1: An Ethics framework​ from Chapter 5 of the ​Human
Relations​ OER textbook.
3. Read Borland’s Brave Beginning.
4. Navigate to the threaded discussion and respond to the
following prompts:
a. Briefly summarize the Borland Case.
b. Clearly identify and discuss each of the Four Levels of
Ethical Issues from your reading in the ​Human
Relations​ text that are present in the Borland case.
i. In your analysis, be sure to discuss how the
players, in this case, were impacted at each of
the four levels.
c. What do you think about Kahn’s actions? Do his
actions amount to shrewd business, deception, or
both?
d. Some might argue that since everyone “won” in the
end, Kahn’s decision was ethical. Do you agree? Why
or why not?
e. Review the Ted Talk ​Our Buggy Moral Code​. What is a
personal fudge factor? Does Kahn’s actions in the
Borland case violate your personal fudge factor? Why or
Why not?
f. If you were Kahn, what might have been some ways to
achieve the same outcome but in a more ethical
https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_human-relations/s09-be-ethical-at-work.html

manner? How do these approaches take into account
the four levels of ethical issues from your reading?
5. Each response should contain a detailed evaluation that
demonstrates clear, insightful critical thinking
6. Guidelines:
a. Your 1.3 post should be at least 500 words in length
b. Your 1.3 post must include two scholarly sources that
are properly cited according to APA guidelines. For
questions on APA style, go to ​OCLS APA Writing Styles
Guide​.
c. Your 1.3 post is due by the end of Workshop One.
7. Be prepared in Workshop Two to engage in discussion
regarding your initial post. You will compose two replies to
separate student’s posts as rebuttals to their arguments.
Then, in Workshop Three, you will need to compose a final
rebuttal​ ​to a student who made a reply on your initial post.

View the associated rubric
Access the Discussion postings page
Listen
Dictionary
Translate
https://ocls.indwes.edu/style_guide.html
https://ocls.indwes.edu/style_guide.html
https://brightspace.indwes.edu/d2l/common/dialogs/quickLink/quickLink.d2l?ou=131475&type=rubric&rCode=iwu-676166
https://brightspace.indwes.edu/d2l/common/dialogs/quickLink/quickLink.d2l?ou=131475&type=discuss&rcode=iwu-666737