Bribe or No Bribe

If I work for a company as an employee, then I represent that company and must follow their policies....If I don't like their policies to the point that I find them unacceptable, then I will find another position with another company whose policies are in line with my own....If you are willing to work in foreign countries, you must be willing to accept the risk that is involved, and be aware of your company's policies toward any situation that might arise....and I would have it in writing....

There is no right way to do a wrong thing!

I have had multiple business lunches and dinners. Typically, it is done "Dutch" where everyone pays their own way. Problem solved.

Number 3 just seems silly. This is why we have embassies in foreign countries so you don't have to play Rambo.

Many companies that deal with foreign customers and send employees also have special insurance policies and security arrangements for these kind of scenarios. You should only have to contact your company's HR department and possibly your embassy if the company so instructs.

I think it would have to be a pretty expensive lunch to be considered a bribe. I can be had, but not for thirty bucks.

Treating a potential client to lunch is a salesman ploy, not a bribe. If someone in the position of signing a multimillion dollar deal can be swayed with such a tactic, I believe a career change may be in order for that individual.

Yeah, there are specified amounts or limits you can spend. Usually depends on the company policies.

It's been awhile, so I don't know the dollar amounts, but I have had some foreign guest from Asia and they typically offer a small gift. You can accept it as long as it has no significant value.

I don't see #1 as a dilemma. Why would you turn down a lunch meeting?

.

The situation in #2 doesn't seem typical of 'western tradition'. Business meetings over meals can be very productive. If there are trust issues raised concerning the cost of lunch affecting your integrity and possibly swaying a multimillion dollar contract, it sounds like the problem runs pretty deep.

.

In situation #3, it sounds like the right thing was done, even though the company may not have seen it as a positive. It doesn't sound like you would choose to do anything different knowing the final outcome. You can ask the company to hear your side of the story again and reconsider. You can document well what happened for future employers to understand. In the end none of that may make up for the cost, but you can sleep at night and look yourself in the mirror knowing you did what was right even if others fail to see it.

Feeling a bit dramatic today?

First:What you describe in No.1 & No.2 is at best/worst a conflict of interest, not a bribe.

Second: You are putting the cart before the horse. The dilemma is when the consultant/company takes the client to lunch in order to soften up the person making the decision on whether to hire them or not. The client taking you to lunch usually happens later in the game, when they are trying to schmooze a little something extra for nothing.

Third: I have trouble seeing a "lunch" as even a factor in a "multi-million dollar deal". From either side.

Forth: I would take No.1 and use it as a way to discuss cultural differences with that client. e.g. "Thank you for the offer, but my companies policy is... What is the policy/norm here?" You have deal with those cultural differences sometime, why not now.

Fifth: On No.2 you have to make a decision: Is following the cultural norm better for MY company, than a bureaucratic policy? Those policies are setup as a guideline in most companies. When you get to the government sector, they are written in Titanium, and mean: Thou shalt not under any circumstances, make any decision by thy self.

Sixth: On point No.3, it still isn't a bribe, its ransom, but that isn't the point. The point is it is theft/embezzlement. If you feel that it is unjust there other ways to handle the situation. Including using your own money to free your colleague.

That's a good point on #3. If the company objects to the payment (and possibly even if they had not), the right thing to do is reimburse the petty cash from personal funds.

What?

Why out of my pocket? How come the guy I bailed out of trouble shouldn't be on the hook for repaying the petty cash box?

Because you made the call to take the petty cash. The guy you bailed out should repay you, but he didn't take the cash from the company.

"... he didn't take the cash from the company."

Well, there is something to that. You make a valid point.

I'm telling ya something: I'd better get a couple of free lunches out of that guy.

That's for sure.

Here, even lunches are definately out!!

It relates back to "perception". It may be believed that the particular business that you had lunch with has derived some additional advantage through the time together.

As far as the third scenario, I'd leave that to the professionals.

So, can each party go to different places for lunch and text each other?

Or, maybe there is a ordinance about texting while eating, too?

Okay, I am being a smarty pants. :-/

You are correct that the other party could text during lunch, but then so could any other competitor, so that would be regarded as equal advantage.

We are allowed to accept meal offers and other items however, but we have a corporate "gifts register" where such items are openly declared (publicly available) and reported to the next board meeting.

In scenario 3, a new legal category needs to be created for the person who fired "you": mandatory homicide.

(There, that'll up the ante.)

Based on experiences and common business practices #1 and #2 are no brainers. As long as they are local customs and are within the limits you have described --> go.

#3 is a little tougher. If I was in that scenario my final decision would be based on "What would I want others to do if I was the person being held captive?" Would I want to die because some stuffy bean head promoted to corporate wants to present a always law abiding corporate? Answer- NO! If I was the one who could get one of my fellow workers out I would have no hesitation to do so. The financial cost I would expect to be reimbursed by the corp. if he/she were a company employee. At the end though I would ask him for reimbursement which he is alive because of it. If all other avenues were unsuccessful I would curse a little and chalk it up to experience. If petty cash covered it the amount demanded must not have been very high.

If I was the captive and petty cash got me out I might be insulted that I wasn't worth more!

Good Luck, Old Salt

As I said, there is a whole international business sector that now provides for business traveler insurance for what is called Political Kidnapping.

The insurance companies negotiate the ransom, if required.

There are also private security firms that specialize in this field that work on both preventative measures and after the fact.

The Number 3 scenario is nothing new and has been going on for many decades. It is highly doubtful that any company would simply abandon one of their employees in some foreign country as the original poster suggested. If you think paying a ransom is expensive, wait until you see what the attorneys of the missing one's family will do.

Anonymous Hero-

Yes, there is "business traveler insurance for what is called Political Kidnapping." There are also fanatics, politically motivated individuals, crooked politicians, stock holders, squeaky clean corporate "always look good" administrators. They could care less about another person's problems especially one that does not put them at risk.

Despite there being Insurance companies, private security firms and others with some potential benefits there is nothing like being released to friendly hands. Would you want to be held captive under the scenario cited? Certainly not me! Abandonment of the captive is not an unheard of thing and more frequent as the corporation gets bigger. Although probably not released to the public, this is a more frequent approach than would it be thought of.

If the cost of release is small enough that it can be disbursed from petty cash, get it done and the situation ended. That is the quickest, simplest, cheapest and least publicized way to handle it. Whether the captive is released or not the cost of release will be higher the next time someone is held captive. Get it done and the captive in safe hands. The hands of the captors are not safe hands.

"A bird in the hands is worth two in the brush!"

Good Luck, Old Salt

1. Policy should be cleared with your company before travelling.

2. Subject to the above: Your mission is to secure the deal and anything you need
to do to achieve that, according to the ways/laws of the country, is permissible.

3. It also goes (without saying if you are human) that you should do, whatever is
necessary, to help your fellow traveller providing it does not jeopardise your mission.

While it is nice to be "Snow white" also; to present such a face; many people of the
world prevent (sadly in too many instances) an enjoyable overseas experience.
Therefore some allowance needs to be given to those managing these situations.

If all else fails,..... we need to employ other means.

jt.

Life is an endless struggle full of frustrations and challenges, but eventually..
you find a hairstylist you like.

lunch is not a bribe in any country, green fees and lunch at Pebble beach might be but I'd still accept even if it cost my job. how many chances will you get to golf that course???