Answer to Week 3
B. This is more of the same – the mining sector is full of these conflicts and the root of it all is money. The pressure to make money is powerful and often clouds people’s judgement even if they’re making a decision that’s clearly wrong. Because of this I think there are problems with how closely the government regulates this sector – the laws around conflicts are too lax. BtoB is taking advantage of shoddy practices & my prediction is it will come back to haunt them.
This response is typical of a Zone 3 ‘pure thinking’ answer. In particular, the respondent talks about the cause and effect relationships going on in the scenario and has suggested the regulatory framework as leading to a more localised problem of BtoB’s corporate behaviour.
Week 4 – Case Study*
ProSuccess go through to the final stage and, after some internal wrangling on the board, are awarded funding from PTwhy to take forward their procurement idea into full commercialisation.
Things seem to be going well – ProSuccess have managed to secure a major mining client and your focus, as GM of BtoB, is shifting to finding potential applicants for the next funding round.
Then disaster strikes.
An article appears in the Financial Times linking Mr Jones Snr, the head of PTwhy, to various irregular property transactions while head of the Minerals Department. The article also mentions the link between a former BtoB funding applicant – Minescan – and Mr Jones Snr.
Jane Carrow of ProSuccess is furious as unsuccessful funding applicants are gathering support through a negative Facebook campaign to overturn all decisions of BtoB involving PTwhy and Mr Jones Snr with some saying BtoB itself should be shut down.
Jane Carrow has asked for an urgent meeting to hear what you are going to do.
Challenge question: what are the implications in this scenario for BtoB and companies like it?