'Information Privacy\r'

'? MODULE 2: grimace Informational Privacy Without a doubt, we live in an pur cunningu where integrity, respect and adept ethics play a primaeval role in the growth and achiever of many singulars and companies. Unfortunately, this was non the guinea pig for Patricia Dunn, former chairperson of the Hewlett-Packard (HP) climb on of film directors who was forced to dislodge her job.\r\nShe was at the marrow squash of a major(ip) controversy regarding her effort to suss out who from the mesa was leaking confidential information to the press reason outly HPs interest in buying a nonher technology company, their corporate strategy, championship plans, fifty-fifty their deliberations over who they would bring as CEO. This was a major issue as, not only was mad discussions of the table made in the public eye(predicate) in the media, the level of trust between distri only ifively scorecard member was greatly affected. In a 60 minutes interview with Lesley Stahl and Patricia Dunn (CBS broadcast), â€Å"the Hewlett-Packard board of directors was describe as a leaky ship.\r\nSecret board deliberations were ending up in the press go forth and pay off, and it was decided that virtually issue had to be done”. That something one bottomland argue was the most famous leak probe since Watergate, and beca pulmonary tuberculosis of it, Patricia Dunn (who was chairman of the HP board of directors) was faced with sinful charges. The charges stem from the use of something c every bear(predicate)ed pretexting †where someone calls up the cry companies and impersonate someone else in order to pose their records.\r\nThis technique is more than a simple lie as it most often involves some prior research or set up and the use of pieces of known information (for example, impersonation, date of birth, social surety number -SSN) to establish legitimacy in the reason of the target. Pretexting, in my opinion, is dearly wrong because it is dece itful and it invades the privateness of someone else regardless of how useful the act is in solving an investigation. Needless to say, privacy is a fundamental human right that almost every(prenominal) individual seeks to preserve.\r\nFor the Hewlett-Packard case, board members privacy was in fact invaded but some may argue that such aggression was for a cause. According to the deontological school of thought, the act may be considered the right thing to do even if it produces a bad consequence (as with the forced giving up of Patricia Dunn). For deontologists, the ends or consequences of the actions are not central in and of themselves neither are the intentions. Only the act itself is considered important. Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher, explain this theory of ethics more clearly. He argued that to act in the incorruptly right way, people must act according to duty.\r\nThat was the case with Patricia Dunn, she believed she had a duty to find out who was leaking sensitiv e details of discussions of the board to the press. In her 60 Minutes interview with Lesley Stahl, she verbalize that many directors expressed to her their vehement opinion that something had to be done to determine the microbe of the leak and to bring them to an end. In fact, majority of the directors told her during her introductory few weeks as Chairman that, â€Å"next to trail the boards CEO search, coming to grips with HPs famously leaky board should be her top priority”.\r\nThat was exaltly what Dunn did which was a major task in and of itself. Following on Kants argument, he claims, a person has a dear(p) leave behind when he or she ‘acts out of respect for the moral law. People ‘act out of respect for the moral law when they act in some way because they get chthonian ones skin a duty to do so. So, the only thing that is truly good in itself is a good will, and a good will is only good when the willer chooses to do something because it is that per sons duty. Thus, according to Kant, goodness depends on rightness. I think Patricia Dunn was simply doing her duty.\r\nLooking at the HP case in more detail, it is obvious that Patricia Dunn did not know the full agenda of the private investigators and what was elusive in finding out who was the source of the leaks. Dunn says. â€Å"The caprice that I supervised, orchestrated, approved all of the ways in which this investigation occurred is just a complete myth. It’s a falsehood. It’s a damaging lie. ” She admit, however, pursuance advice from Bob Wayman, HPs then(prenominal) acting CEO , chief financial officer and Director of Administration, on an affimative action to be taken on the problem of leaks in the company.\r\nHe was advantageously respected and trusted by many in the company so based on his integrity, she (Dunn) had every reason to rely on his recommendations as to how the protective cover issues at the board level could best be handled given that all the control functions of the company were under his oversight. Mr Wayman referred her to an individual within his organisation who then referred her to Mr Delia (private investigator) who then took the extraordinary step of spying on the records of all the directors (including herself) as well as journalists. At some point during the investigation process in 2005, she (Dunn) became certain from Mr.\r\nDelia that phone records were accessed as a standard fate of such investigations by HP. In an interview with NEWSWEEK, Dunn stated that she was aware HP was obtaining the phone records of suspected leakers as long ago as 2005. But she did not know about the pretexting until late June, when she saw an email to Perkins from HPs outside counsel, Larry Sonsini and later acknowledged that HPs tactics were â€Å" fearful” and â€Å"embarrassing”. Essentially, the investigation went on and the leaker of the companys sensitive discussions was identified.\r\nThe public disclosure of the leaker at a board clashing did not ‘sit well with some members on the board as they thought it could have been dealth with differently without causation embarrasment for the leaker . This led to a lot of uphoar and Patricia Dunn was forced to resign. I think her forced resignation grew out of a personal dispute between her and Perkins ( who was also a well-known member of the board of directors and a c escape friend of the leaker) . To me, Patricia Dunn did what she had to do for the best interest of the company.\r\nHence, she should not have been forced to resign. Reading a account by Hewlett-Packards Board of Directors, â€Å"Pattie Dunn has been a valuable director of HP for many years. We acknowledge all of the good work that Pattie has accomplished on behalf of HP. She helped stabilized the business during the CEO transition. She led the search committee for our juvenile chief executive officer, which led to our hiring of Mark Hurd and the owing(p ) performance of the business over the last xviii months. She served our board with distinction as chairman for the last year and a half.\r\nThe board felt it was important to find the sources of the leaks of HP confidential information, and she informed the board that she has taken steps to do so. We have never questioned her intentions, her integrity or her ethics.. we regret that we will lose her contributions to the board and appreciate that she has agree to our request”. It is ostensible that she had good character and was well repected. She accepted the resposibility to commit the sources of the leaks but she did not propose the specific methods of the investigation which means the premise on which she was forced to resign was not justified!\r\n'