Number 2 How would you describe the respective attitudes of Martin and Green: ethnocentric, polycentric, or geocentric?

What factors do you suspect of having influenced their respective attitudes?

The respective attitude of Charles Martin is geocentric because he respects Ugandas culture based on perspective of people in Uganda. Martins decision to approve such a nepotism action or ceremony in Uganda prove that he developed a level of respect for the way things were expected to be done in Uganda, not based on company values. This attitude could be influenced by Martins educational background which is majored in African studies and his experience of participating in Peace Corps in Kenya. By those knowledge an experiences Martin began to develop a negative opinion regarding individuals who cant learn and respect other cultures, but he maybe was too extreme in defining this perspective. The respective attitude of James Green is ethnocentric because he makes value judgments about Ugandas culture from perspectives of one's own cultural system, or in this case company culture. He can consistently take an objective standpoint to maintain homecountry policies while conducting business in Uganda because he was prioritizing company values. Green was very focus in following company and home-country procedures so it makes him reconsidering to sustain Martin on companys projects. Green can have this perspective because he never conducted business project in Uganda before and was not familiar with African culture. Moreover, Green strategic position in the company give him more responsibility to committed to companys values, and in this case Greens objectivity can be an effective way in handling such a cultural problems in business.

Number 3 Who was right, Green or Martin, about Martins more controversial actions in facilitating the project? How might things have turned out if Martin had not been a member of the project team?

As the explanation in case of number 2, each Green and Martin had different respective attitude. Several Martins controversial action in facilitating the project - His lifestyle was inconsistent wit HG culture. It would be a big deal for company to be worried in assumption Martin with his own ethnocentric believed this lifestyle could ease him to do business deal with them. - His preference isolating himself from the expatriate community which made little use in helping colleagues adapt the kind of life that would be comfortable for them in the alien environment of Uganda. This action was contra with the assumption that Martin did different lifestyle in case ease company to do deal business with people. - He did such practices which were both normal and legal in Uganda business dealings but they bordered on the ethical in US organization and did nepotism in hiring practice. Nevertheless a company may not border ethical issue though for being able to operate well in local area besides this issue also would make company bad in society. - He held and joined sacrifice ceremony with a religion caretaker hired by him for company which could offend Ugandas Christian as majority. As International Company which did operation in local area, it should be fair to society so that not just support to several groups in society. Martin should consider how the ceremony effect to other society related to the company image. According to the function of both Green and Martin as the people who responsible for the dam project of company by not harming people in society in Uganda where project located, Green was right in case of Martin did several unethical actions which could give effect to company and society. Unless Martin had been member of project, there would be two possible situations. First, no ethical border issue and nepotism in project process but society might be difficult to do business deal with company regarding Martin had skill on that. Second, ethical issue and nepotism would be there in project in case it had been society culture so that company would be hard to complete the project.