F & C International, Inc. Case 4.2

1470 words 6 pages
Jon Fries, Fletcher Anderson, Craig Schuster, and Catherine Sprauer are the main figures in this case and they had important responsibilities in F&C International, Inc.
Jon Fries was the President, CEO, and managing director of F&C international, Inc. He was in charge of the total management of the company. The key responsibilities of Jon Fries were to align the company, internally and externally, with his strategic vision. His duties were to facilitate business outside of the company while guiding employees and other executive officers towards a central objective. As a CEO, Jon Fries had high interaction with F&C`s independent auditors, but he misguided them by creating false documents, mislabeling inventory, and undercutting the
…show more content…

It was his responsibility to make sure that business operations were conducted in good way in his company but when he found that there is fraud involve in the business transactions, he did not mention this to anyone which was highly unethical and unprofessional approach by a COO of a Company.
Craig Schuster was the CFO of F&C Company. He knew that throughout 1992, there were various problems in F&C`s accounting records. He learned that his subordinates could not locate many items listed in F&C`s perpetual inventory records. He also determined that approximately $1 million of F&C`s work-in-process inventory was classified as finished goods. He prepared a 23-page list of $1.5 million of inventory allegedly stored in Warehouse Q and forwarded this memo to Fletcher Anderson (COO). This memo was also indicating that the inventory could not be located or was defective. It is right to say that Schuster took action about suspicious activities and wrote a memo for Anderson but he did not mention these activities to board or independent auditor, he should have wait for Anderson's reply or insist in front of him to take action but he resigned. It was his duty to inform board members and/or independent auditors about the ongoing fraud because Anderson was not taking any action. Schuster chose not to take further actions. So I would say, he was unethical (scale -50) and unprofessional but better than Fletcher


  • case
    2003 words | 9 pages
  • Nike, Inc. Strategic Case Study
    6076 words | 25 pages
  • Dell Case Study
    3221 words | 13 pages
  • The Strategic Analysis of Google, Inc.
    3382 words | 14 pages
  • DMD Case Analysis
    3586 words | 15 pages
  • Modernization of Ntuc Income Case Study
    14060 words | 57 pages
  • Nike Inc.: China
    5610 words | 23 pages
  • F.C Case Study Harvard Business School
    14024 words | 57 pages
  • Information Technology Project Management Appendix Answers
    19468 words | 78 pages
  • Walmart
    16421 words | 66 pages