GROUP ASSIGNMENT

BPMN 3123 MANAGEMENT ETHICS (A181)

MOVIE: MARGIN CALL

GROUP: G

GROUP MEMBERS:

1) NUR ZALIKA BT SHAHABUDIN ( 247400 )

2) NORIZZATY BT KHAIRUDIN NIZAM ( 247703 )

3) NUR ATHIERAH BT MOHD ASRI ( 247218 )

4) SITI AISHAH BT MAZLAN ( 250945 )

LECTURER NAME: EN. ZAHID ARIFFIN BIN IDRUS

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 20 OCTOBER 2018

Movie Summary ( MARGIN CALL)

The movie “Margin Call” is a 2011 American film written and directed by J. C. Chandor. The
principal story takes place over a 24-hour period at a large Wall Street investment firm during
the initial stages of the financial crisis of 2008. In focus are the actions taken by a group of
employees during the subsequent financial collapse.

An investment firm begins a huge layoff on the trading floor during a normal business day.
Currently only 33 workers left in the firm as 80% of the floor was just sent home forever.
Among those let go is Eric Dale, head of risk management. Eric Dale tries to speak about his
current, unfinished project, first with human resources staff and then with desk head Will
Emerson, but is told that this is no longer his concern. While being escorted out of the building
he meets one of his risk analysts, Peter Sullivan, and gives him a pen drive to look at with a
vague instruction to "be careful."

Peter Sullivan works late that night to finish Eric Dale's project, and discovers that current
volatility in the firm's portfolio of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) has exceeded the
historical volatility levels of the positions. Because of excessive leverage, if the firm's assets
decrease by 25%, the loss will be greater than the value of the firm and the firm will face
bankruptcy. Peter Sullivan and his colleague, junior analyst Seth Bregman, tell Will Emerson
about the situation. Will Emerson alerts floor head Sam Rogers, who also returns to the office.
They attempt to contact Eric Dale, but the company shut off his phone and he hadn't yet
returned home.

They have meetings with division head Jared Cohen, chief risk management officer Sarah
Robertson, and finally CEO John Tuld. Jared Cohen's plan is for the firm to quickly dump all
of the toxic assets in a fire sale before the market learns of their worthlessness, thereby limiting
the firm's exposure, a plan favored by John Tuld. Sam Rogers protests that dumping the firm's
toxic assets will spread the risk throughout the financial sector and destroy the firm's
relationships with its clients. He also warns Jared Cohen that their customers will quickly learn
of the firm's plans once they realize that the firm is only selling the toxic securities, but is not
buying any new ones.

They finally meet Eric Dale back at his home in Brooklyn, and Will Emerson is able to
convince him to return to the office, informing him that the firm will not pay him his severance
and other benefits unless he agrees to participate in their plan. Will Emerson also tells Seth he
will probably lose his job in the crisis, but will get a large severance, while explaining to him
the corrupt, cyclical nature of the markets. It is revealed that Sarah Robertson, Jared Cohen,
and John Tuld were aware of the risks in the weeks leading up to the crisis. John Tuld offers
Sarah Robertson up as the scapegoat, putting the blame of the crisis on her and forcing her
resignation. Both Eric Dale and Sarah Robertson are instructed to remain in the office all day
and do nothing in return for an increase to their severance packages. Sarah Robertson expresses
regret for not doing more to stop the crisis.

Before morning, John Tuld is able to convince Sam Rogers to go along with Jared Cohen's
plan. In a speech to his traders in preparation for the fire sale, Sam Rogers warns them that by
participating, they are effectively ruining their reputations and ending their careers in the
industry. Before the markets open, Sam Rogers tells his traders they will receive seven figure
bonuses if they achieve a 93% reduction in certain MBS asset classes. He admits that the traders
are effectively destroying their own jobs and careers, severing relationships with their clients.
The firm successfully pulls off the sale despite growing suspicion from their buyers, as the firm
takes huge losses while dumping positions for cents on the dollar. After trading hours end,
Jared Cohen tells Sam Rogers there will be another round of layoffs, but Sam Rogers will keep
his job. Angry that he was retained, Sam Rogers confronts John Tuld, but John Tuld dismisses
his protests, claiming that the current crisis is no different from various markets of the past,
and that gains and losses are simply part of the economic cycle. He persuades Sam Rogers to
stay at the firm for another 24 months, promising that there will be a lot of money to be made
from the coming crisis. John Tuld also tells Sam Rogers he will promote Peter Sullivan as he
contributing a lot in discovering the problem that arise. Sam Rogers says he will accept the
deal, but only because he needs the money.

In the final scene, Sam Rogers digs a hole in his front yard to bury his dog who died of cancer
in reference to John Tuld's comment that he could have been digging holes for his life.
2.1 Ethical Awareness

A business cannot exist unless the people involved in the business and its surrounding society
adhere to some minimal standards of ethics. There are some ethical issues being shown in this
movie “Margin Call”:

a) Key man dependency and lack of transparency. The entire movie revolves around the very
late discovery of the projected losses by an analyst, Peter Sullivan. His boss, Eric Dale was
working on a project to try to figure out what was wrong with the firm’s models, but he was
laid off before he could finished his analysis. This scenario suggests the conclusion that if the
boss had not been working alone or had been sharing his work in progress sufficiently, then
the problems could have been discovered earlier and the entire dilemma could have been
avoided or at least mitigated. An insecure overdependence on the work of one vulnerable man
and a lack of honest disclosure led to this firm’s undoing from the very start.

b) The way of executives made decision. This is clearly shown when John Tuld the CEO of
the firm made decision to overcome the financial crisis problem. He said “it just money” and
“so the firm may survive” the audience begins to understand that the financial system can be
an unfair moral ethics in order to salvage a firm that has taken too many risk in order to increase
profits and inflate employee earnings. John Tuld seems like don’t even care about the assets
that they monitor. This type of ignorant attitude is the last quality that a banker should possess.

c) The third ethical issues is when the management is willing to do whatever it takes to save
themselves and protect their personal assets. This includes liquidating entire departments, and
ruining the integrity of their own employee’s careers in the process. The management team will
cut down the number of workers as the result of the financial crisis without considering the
impact of it toward the workers.

d) The Chief Executive Officer of the firm, John Tuld who is willing to “kill the market” to
protect his own interests, without concerning for the firm’s investors or even the strength of
the global economy. When money is no longer an issue and consider money as “made up” just
like John Tuld, you lose all concern for the individuals who do not hold the same viewpoint.
This firm hide their risks and their risks disclosure typically do not give investors a clear
understanding of the firm’s biggest exposures. This is because bankers do not measure, rank
and disclose exposures in terms of impact on shareholder value.
e) Lack of maturity in understanding situations. In this movie, John Tuld who is one of the top
executives in the firm who asked Peter Sullivan to explain to him about what is actually
happening in the firm during the 2 AM urgent meeting. Peter explained that for the past 36 to
40 months the firm has begun packaging new mortgage-backed security (MBS) products that
combine several different tranches of rating classifications in one tradable security. That has
been enormously profitable until now the problem which is taking the firm about a month to
layer these products correctly, thereby posing a challenge from a Risk Management standpoint.
John Tuld asked Peter Sullivan to explain to him as if he is speaking to a young child or a
golden retriever. Top executives like John Tuld should understand and able to talk to their
employees about the financial problem. It is troubling that the people making decisions for
influential banks that affect the whole world’s economy need things to be explained to him as
if a child.

f) The ethical issues can also be seen when we do not have a discussion regarding company
problems with other knowledgeable executives. The final decision making comes down to John
Tuld who openly admits, “I don’t get any of this stuff”. He therefore makes his decision to sell
off all of the toxic assets with nothing but his own interests in mind, despite the approval from
Sam Rogers. If we are admittedly know very little about something, it is usually a good idea to
listen to someone who does. John Tuld chooses to ignore Sam Rogers’s advice and to instead
minimize the damage done to the firm at the cost of his employee’s careers and the bank’s
relationship with its competitors. Sam Rogers points out the ethical issues in selling something
that has no value and John Tuld responds that they are just selling to willing buyer at the current
fair market price so that the firm may survive.

g) Bribery issue that happens in the firm. The movie “Margin Call” portrays the unethical
character of employees of an unnamed Wall Street firm when a decision is made by the firm’s
leaders to reduce the firm’s loss exposure to an imminent financial crisis by selling the firm’s
toxic assets to its clients. The movie raises the following ethical question, “Would Wall Street
employees compromise their moral standards and reputation for a huge pile of cash?” The low
level traders are thrown into the moral dilemma mix at 6.30 AM when they are told by their
boss Sam Rogers that “the party’s over as of this morning”. In order to induce the traders to
destroy their reputation and careers by helping the company sell out its clients, the traders are
offered a one- time $2.7 million payoff if they achieve 93% sale of their assets. When promised
this bribe, the employees pick up their account folders without hesitation and begin to sell.
CEO John Tuld’s career for making a living in business is to “be first, be smarter or cheat”.
When he learns about the looming financial meltdown, he commands his employees to sell the
firm’s worthless assets. Even though, John Tuld knows that his orders will cause huge losses
for the clients who buy these assets, at the end of the day, John Tuld calmly has dinner in the
firm’s dining room, showing no remorse for the lives he is ruining.

Bribery is also shown when John Tuld meets with Sam Rogers privately and offers a generous
compensation to him and his traders that take place in the sale. Sam Rogers states again the
ethical issues involved but nonetheless, he will stand by the firm. John Tuld then meets with
Sarah Roberson and informs her that Wall Street needs “a head to roll” and that it will be her.
Again, he offers a generous compensation and informs her to not fight him against this.

h) Examination of greed and corporate pay is extremely relevant. The firm offer bonuses to
their employees for colluding with the firm are where the plot turns sour. Rewarding a few
traders with millions to cheat their peers, who will lose heavily on the transactions, in unethical
and should not be tolerated as the movie suggests, those employees will most likely be
unemployed in the highly contentious job market that would emerge through the crisis.

i) Using rude words when speaking to the employees. The urgent meeting which was held at
2 AM which was attended by all the executives and some of the related employees. Jared Cohen
who is one of the managers used rude words when heard the time the meeting being held. He
also get out from the meeting room and causes everyone in the meeting room to get really
annoyed of him. But later he did came back in.

j) Stressful work environment leads to unhealthy lifestyle. Will Emerson feel very stressful
that meeting night. Will Emerson, Seth and Peter Sullivan go to the rooftop of the building and
Will start to smoke. Will also feel like jumping down the building due to the incident that
happened in that firm. But Peter and Seth are there and stop him from doing so.
2.2 Awareness of stakeholders

The stakeholders that been mentioned in Q 2.1 is executive, shareholders, employees and
customers. The characters in the movie do unethical things since the societal costs of high
finance, the power of self-rationalization, and the easy embrace of personal corruption is his
terrain. The constraints that the movie character had to face is not simply human nature, it is
system that had been created such incentives, where the only choice is the disgraceful one.
While we may not be able to change human nature, we may, one hopes, be able to fix the
system of incentives that leads to such lamentable outcome.

a) Key man dependency and lack of transparency. No one wants to have the reputation of
being a snitch in an industry where hiring and bonuses are based on relationships as much as
quarterly results, but the stakeholders really have to depend on their man and believe on them.
Traders and market makers are like sharks, always wanting to move forward, onto the next
deal. There is no percentage in looking back.

b) The way of executive made decision. The stakeholders have to be responsible on what they
are deciding to. “Margin Call” is a closely-observed study of motivations, all of which differ,
but all of which ultimately lead to essentially the same devastating outcome. One could leave
the film with the view that everyone is corruptible, that we all yield to our weaknesses once the
incentives are sufficiently great. While that may be true, the film’s underlying thrust may be
more complex and more harrowing.

c) Management is willing to do whatever it takes to save them and protect their personal
assets. Upon learning how dire the situation has become, the CEO John Tuld, portrayed by
Jeremy Irons, says, “So what you are telling me is that the music is about to stop and we are
going to be left holding the biggest bag of odorous excrement ever assembled in the history of
capitalism.” Tuld responds with the excuse every Wall Street executive used when
investigators came calling after the shit hit the investors: “We are selling to willing buyers at
the current fair market price so that we may survive. ”In the real world, the buyers were not as
sophisticated and the deals not as transparent as bankers claimed.

d) The Chief Executive Officer of the firm, John Tuld who is willing to “kill the market” to
protect his own interests, without concerning for the firm’s investors or even the strength of
the global economy. “Margin Call” captures a day in the life of a Lehman Brothers-like bank
as it challenges to avoid falling into the first cracks of the financial crisis. Efficiently paced and
marvelously acted, the movie reveals how large financial institutions operate and the
motivations of the people who work within them. At this point, the movie could just as easily
be called, “Damage Control: When Greed Turns to Fear”. Sam tries to talk to John Tuld out of
his plan. “If you do this, you will kill the market for years. It’s over. And you are selling
something that you know has no value,” he says.

e) Lack of maturity in understanding situations. Peter Sullivan is the questioning heart of

“Margin Call”. He has a doctorate in engineering with a specialty in propulsion — literally a
rocket scientist. Sullivan operates in the constricted space of the Wall Street risk manager. Risk
managers and accountants are among the few who actually know what the numbers mean. They
see the whole picture. It’s a running joke through the movie that Sullivan’s bosses, right up to
the CEO, don’t understand the financial wizardry behind the products they make and sell.
When confronted with Peter Sullivan’s analysis, Sam Rogers says, “Oh Jesus, you know I can’t
read these things. Just speak to me in English.” We can realize that even the senior employee
do not really understand the exact situation of their company in that scene. These can affect the
employees views upon the CEO of the firm.

f) The ethical issues can also be seen when we do not have a discussion regarding company
problems with other knowledgeable executives. They just pull out the decision to stop Eric
Dale even when he is working on something important that can ruin the whole company.
Among the casualties is the risk manager for the trading group, Eric Dale, played by Stanley
Tucci. On the way out the door, Eric Dale tells his young protege, Peter Sullivan, that he has
been working on something important. As the elevator closes, he hands Sullivan a zip drive
and says cryptically, “Be careful.”

g) Bribery issue that happens in the firm. The employees should have been aware on this
issues since it will totally infected the company. “If you really want to do this with your life
you have to believe that you’re necessary. And you are. People want to live like this in their
cars and their big houses that they can’t even pay for? Then you’re necessary. The only reason
they all get to continue living like kings is because we’ve got our fingers on the scales in their
favour. I take my hand off and the whole world gets really fair really quickly and nobody
actually wants that. They say they do but they don’t. They want what we have to give them,
but they also want to play innocent and pretend they have no idea where it came from. That’s
more hypocrisy than I’m willing to swallow."
h) Examination of greed and corporate pay is extremely relevant. Peter Sullivan and Seth,
played by Penn Badgley, are still new enough to the system to be doubtful of its utility. Seth is
captivated with the money Wall Street offers and particularly impressed by his boss Will
Emerson, who pulled down $2.5 million the previous year. They briefly wonder whether that’s
“right,” but push the unwelcome thought away unanswered. When Emerson tells the eager
young men that “you learn to spend what is in your pocket” and that most of his money is gone,
they are incredulous. He itemizes his expenses for them, including $76,520 for hookers, booze
and dancers. Their adulation only increases when he admits he claimed most of that back as
entertainment expenses. Later when Seth bemoans the fact that normal people will be hurt by
their actions, Emerson’s ferocious response is shocking both for its amorality and its kernels
of truth.

i) Using rude words when speaking to the employees. In some companies, the rude words
seems to be common even in the meeting. Even the issues may looks like the small one, but
the management and the stakeholders must take it as something important things since it will
affect the performance of the employees and at the same time showing the good image to the
surrounding people.

j) Stressful work environment leads to unhealthy lifestyle. Will Emerson who smokes and
had the intention to jump from the building will cause trouble to many people especially his
family and to the firm. He do has a better alternatives that is to more patient and face the
challenges calmly.
2.3 Ethical Reasoning

Ethical reasoning is necessary in the business world to keep company operations running
smoothly and fairly. Use ethical reasoning in business situations to maintain a professional
reputation internally with employees and externally with the business world. Based on all the
ethical issues in the movie “Margin Call”, each of that has different views from various
stakeholders.

a) Key man dependency and lack of transparency. Ethical leadership is made up of being an
ethical role model, treating people fairly, and actively managing ethics in the organization.
Overall, although grouped in different ways, the existing literature sorts the effects and actions
of leaders in relation to ethics into two groups those emanating from the nature and behaviour
of the leader as a person, encouraging emulation, and those arising from the systems and
practices that they set up to regulate conduct on their behalf.

b) The way of executive made decision. The manager should consider which legitimate
stakeholder interests are involved in a corporate activity, or by a management decision. Then,
the firm should consider whether its own actions and impacts generated could represent a risk
of harming legitimate stakeholder interests. As an example, considering the safety requirements
of corporate products, this approach would imply to consider more than the likely product
liability costs in deciding how safe to make consumer goods. It would in fact require managers
to consider that consumers as a stakeholders have a legitimate interest in their own health and
safety. If the management has reasonable concerns that a dangerous or defective product could
represent a risk for consumer safety, they should act in appropriate way by recalling the whole
stock of products on the market potentially involved.

c) Management is willing to do whatever it takes to save them and protect their personal assets.
This includes liquidating entire departments, and ruining the integrity of their own employee’s
careers. Stakeholders such as customers or investors place a higher value on ethical behaviour
in corrupt environments. Moreover, ethical behaviour is more noticeable in corrupt
environments than it would be in ethical ones it is easier for an ethical company to stand out in
a corrupt environment.
d) The Chief Executive Officer of the firm, willing to “kill the market” to protect his own
interests, without concerning for the firm’s investors or even the strength of the global
economy. A leadership approach is a coherent, explicit style of management, not a reflection
of personal style. We found that in effective companies, CEOs do not simply adopt the
leadership approach that suits their personalities but instead adopt the approach that will best
meet the needs of the organization and the business situation at hand.

e) Lack of maturity in understanding situations. In a firm, maturity in understanding the

situation of a problem is very important. If management can solve the problem in the right way,
this can convince the stakeholders to invest in the firm.

f) Do not have a discussion regarding company problems with other knowledgeable executive.
Much effort has also been applied to delineate the actions and behaviours that leaders can
undertake to enhance ethics, including aspects of leadership style that create a culture in which
good conduct is maintained. Nevertheless, analysis of the impact of leadership and its role in
fostering ethical behaviour remains underdeveloped, especially in the public sector, with
insufficient testing of theory against empirical research compared with business ethics.
Moreover, while it is widely recognized that leaders can exert influence through their character
and personal conduct as well as by taking managerial actions to regulate the conduct of others,
there is relatively little research that considers the causal relationships between leaders, systems
of ethics regulation, and resulting standards of behaviour.

g) Bribery issue that happened. Gift giving in the global business world is used to establish or
pay respects to a relationship. Bribery, on the other hand, is more commonly considered the
practice in which an individual would benefit with little or no benefit to the company. It’s
usually paid in relation to winning a business deal, whereas gift giving is more likely to be
ingrained in the culture and not associated with winning a specific piece of business. Bribery,
usually in the form of a cash payment, has reached such high proportions in some countries
that even locals express disgust with the corruption and its impact on daily life for businesses
and consumers.

h) Examination of greed and corporate pay is extremely relevant. Greed has captured some
scholarly attention in management, behavioural finance, law, political economy, and cultural
anthropology. It also appears often in the business press: over 18,000 references to greed in
non-scholarly articles in the ABI/Inform database including terms such as “greedy managers,”
“corporate greed,” and “greedy behaviour,” illustrate that among analysts, journalists, and
members of the general public the concept is well-known and accepted. Yet, the term largely
remains undefined in academic writings. While greed has been linked in a perfunctory manner
to hubris and power, wealth and selfishness, and corporate governance practices and even
related to the excesses that led to the recent economic crisis the specifics of the concept of
greed have generated but minimal interest in scholarly management research.

i) Using rude words when speaking when speaking to the employees. In some workplaces,
swearing might be commonplace as employees are subjected to stressful situations. In others,
workers who use expletives may be frowned upon or even penalised.

j) Stressful work environment leads to unhealthy lifestyle. The study showed that nearly 90
percent of the participants experienced job stress. One quarter of respondents felt they had little
influence over their work situation. More than half had experienced physical assault by nursing
home residents or visitors. Smoking was almost twice as high among nursing aides exposed to
at least three of five job stressors: low decision control, low supervisor support, having another
paid job, physically demanding work, and recent physical assault.
2.4 Ethical Suggestions

Based on all ethical issues in the film, each has different suggestions / alternatives / options.
Here is the suggestion to the ethical issues.

a) Key man dependency and lack of transparency. The bosses need to divide their work
adequately and effectively, then the problem can be found early and the whole dilemma
can be avoided or diminished.

b) The way of executive made decision. As a CEO, he needs to show the good moral in front
of the employees. Then he should have to dominate moral rights to be applied in taking
action to save the firm.

c) Management is willing to do whatever it takes to save them and protect their personal
assets. This includes liquidating entire departments, and ruining the integrity of their own
employee’s careers. The management has to defend its employees because it can help with
the problems that arise. Management can make a pay cut to minimize costs so they can
keep their employees without stopping them.

d) The Chief Executive Officer of the firm, willing to “kill the market” to protect his own
interests, without concerning for the firm’s investors or even the strength of the global
economy. Management should emphasize its customers' rights rather than their own
interests. Although the firm should be turned off but the customer's right must be respected.

e) Lack of maturity in understanding situations. Being the one who is one of the highest
executives in the firm, he has to know clearly his duties as the highest executive in the firm
and probably know that he will be the person who makes a decision making for the firms.

f) Do not have a discussion regarding company problems with other knowledgeable

executive. John Tuld as Chief Executive Officer must listen to the advice of other managers
for self-determination and selflessness only for their own benefits.

g) Corruption issues should not have happened at a firm because corruption can harm the firm
itself and it violates the law of the company. Firms must protect their customers so that
customers' trust in the firm is not lost.
h) Examination of greed and corporate pay is extremely relevant. The firm should not give
reward to the dealers for them to do fraud as they know the effect is that they will lose
heavily on the transaction. They should have found a way to discuss and solve the problems
in a right way by not break the law.

i) Using rude words when speaking when speaking to the employees. As a manager, it should
show a good attitude in front of other workers. He should not use rude words and deserve
his respect for his employees.

j) Stressful work environment leads to unhealthy lifestyle. In this movie, it has been shown
that two employees have prevented their colleagues from jumping into the firm's building
due to working pressure. Every employee should care about the health of himself and his
colleagues.
2.5 Ethical Decision Making

a) In this movie, the moral principle that can be applied is virtue ethics. Virtue ethics is a theory
where it emphasizes the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than doing
one’s duty or acting in order to bring about good consequences. From the movie, Eric Dale as
a boss is trying to figure out what was the solution in the firm’s models but he does not finished
his analysis as he was laid off. The problem can be discovered earlier as each of the employee
and the bosses should have been working together as a team so that they can discover what was
action can be taken. Each of the employees and the boss should not be selfish and be honest so
that the firm could progress in sufficiently.

b) The CEO of the firm, John Tuld had made a decision to do anything so that the firm can
survive by not considering what is right and what is wrong. He just thinks that whatever can
be done as long as the firm can increase profits and does not care about the assets. As a CEO,
he should have bring a positive moral to show to the employees as he is the leader of the firms.
When he shows how he react by doing anything including against moral rights, he shows that
he is lack of incredibility as a leader. As a leader, he should have possess a moral rights to be
applied in taking any action to save the firm.

c) The management taking unethical actions by firing the entire departments to save themselves
and protect their personal assets. They also ruining the integrity of their own employee’s
careers by providing millions in payoffs to each employee. From the movie, the moral ethics
that can be applied is utilitarianism ethics. Utilitarianism is an action where it minimize the
cost and maximize the profits. It states that actions that are morally right are those that produce
the greatest happiness for citizen. The management should taking significant pay cuts in order
to keep as many of the employees as they can. John Tuld income which is $86 million dollar
could been use in order to keep people’s job for the employees to find their job elsewhere.

d) In the movie, John Tuld not concerning about the firm’s investors to protect his own interest.
The firms also hiding their risk by not giving the investors a clear understanding of the firm’s
exposures. In deontology model of ethics, human have rights that must be respected in all
decisions. John told and the firms should informing the investors the value of MBS. The firms
should have to take fall rather than the clients.
e) John told is one of the top executive in the firm but he ask Peter Sullivan on what has
happened in the firm. Virtue ethics should be applied as John Tuld is the top of executive in
the firm, he should know his position well and what actions should he do, and supposedly know
better as he will be the person that make a decision making for the firms. He should not depends
only from the others, but should have playing his role as he hold a big position in the firms.
The actions taken will surely affects the whole firms so that he need to know and runs his works
well.

f) Next is when a company is having any problems, the knowledgeable should have taken a
discussion through the matter. The moral ethics hat can be applied is utilitarianism. John Tuld
making his own decision and not referring to get the opinion from the other. He should have
listen to Sam Roger’s advice and not eagerly sell off all the assets despite the approval of Sam
Rogers. They can reduce the damage not only to the firm but also to the employees career if
John Tuld not being selfish by doing unethical morals and listen to the other opinion to save
the firm.

g) From the movie, the moral ethics that should be applied is justice. There was a scene
happened that the low level traders has sell out its client without hesitation after they was
offered a one- time $2.7 million payoff if they achieve 93% sale of their assets. They should
protect their clients and not taking the bribery as in is an unethical morals. John Tuld also
should not command his employees to sell the firm’s assets even though he knows it will give
a big impacts of losses for the clients. The clients will have big loss and lose their trust to the
firm.

h) In the movie, there was a scene where the firm offer bonuses to their employees for plotting
with the firm. In this case, moral principle that can be applied is justice. The firm should not
giving a reward to the traders for them to cheat to their peers as they know the effects is that
they will lose heavily on the transaction. They should have find a way together and solve the
problems in a right way by not against the law.

i) One of the managers, Jared Cohen are using rude words when he heard the time the meeting
being held. The principle of moral right can be applied here. As human being, we should not
using harsh words towards another such as to the other employees. Jared Cohen should show
a good moral ethics to the employee as he is the manager on the firms and also to get respected
from the other employees. He should handle any situation in a good way and not express any
unsatisfaction by using rude words to the other people.
j) Ethics of care also be shown in the movie. It can be seen when Peter and Seth stopped their
friends, Will Emerson that are having stress to jumping down the firm building. Each of the
employee must take care of each other and not the other people doing wrong things to solve
their problems.
Conclusion

As the conclusion, there are many ethical lesson we can get from the Margin Call
movie. From the movie, each of person should have a virtue ethics. According to Brooks and
Dunn (2012) virtue ethics are determining what virtues a person must possess according to his
position and duties, and how virtues are shown at work. In the movie, John told does not play
his role as a good top executive in the firm as he not knows of what current situation that the
firm are facing. He also not considering of bad impact of his decision by not listening to other
opinion and make his own decision as to save the firm and his own importance. As a CEO, he
should have taking each problem that the firm facing seriously because all the employees live
depend on him.

Next is justice. According to Aristotle, justice is an action that lies between giving too
much and little that can be interpreted to give something to everyone in accordance with what
is his right. There was a bribery from the movie between the employee and the traders. The
management also taking an unethical action by firing the entire departments to save themselves
and protect their personal assets. They also ruining the integrity of their own employee’s
careers by providing millions in payoffs to each employee. The management should have not
doing the unethical morals that can cause bad impacts to the other employees. They should
have taking it together and find a better solution for each of every one and to the firm’s future.

Last lesson that can be learned in the movie is the deontology of ethics. Deontology is
associated with philosopher Immanuel Kant which he believes that ethical actions follow
universal moral laws, such “do not lie, do not steal, do not cheat”. It uses rules to distinguish
right from wrong. From the movie, John Tuld should have concerning about the firm’s
investors to protect his own interest. The firms also should reveals to the investors a clear
understanding of the firm’s exposures. In deontology model of ethics, human have rights that
must be respected in all decisions. John Tuld and the firms should informing the investors the
value of MBS. The firms should have to take fall rather than the clients.
References

Joe Jenckes (Producer), & J.C. Chandor (Director). (2011). Margin Call [ Motion Picture].
United States: Before the Door Pictures.

Manuel G. Velasquez. (2014). Ethical Principle in Business. Harlow, England: Pearson

Education Limited.

Margin Call and unethical crisis management in the financial services industry. (2017,
August 25). Retrieved from: https://compliancecultureblog.com/2017/08/25/margin-call-and-
unethical-crisis-management-in-the-financial-services-industry/

Christopher Orr (2011, October 21). 'Margin Call': A Financial-Crisis Film That's on the
Money. Retrieved from: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/10/margin-
call-a-financial-crisis-film-thats-on-the-money/247116/