Business ethics

Ikea, the makers of furniture and household goods, came under fire recently when it airbrushed women from the catalog it distributed in Saudi Arabia. The controversy over the decision may have caught the global retailer by surprise. Ikea, which has three stores in the country, says that the decision was made in an attempt to adjust to local customs. Like Ikea, Western companies doing business in Saudi Arabia typically try to avoid doing anything that would offend local citizens. Indeed, Ikea claims to have made the decision to remove women from the catalog in deference to the ultra-conservative form of Islam practiced in the country. Women in Saudi Arabia enjoy only limited freedom. They are banned from driving for example, and can only travel overseas alone with the permission of a male guardian. However, it seems that in making the decision, Ikea has offended women in other countries, who view the decision as offensive and wrong. Ikea now says that it made a mistake - that the decision to airbrush the women out of the catalog does not hold with Ikea Group values, and that it regrets its decision. Discussion Questions 1. Is it fair to criticize Ikea for removing women from the catalog it distributed in Saudi Arabia? Could Ikea have simply been trying to avoid being insensitive to local cultural values? Should Ikea in fact be applauded for its efforts to be sensitive to the local culture? 2. Suppose Ikea had used the same catalog in Saudi Arabia that is uses in the United States or Sweden. Would the company have faced criticism that it had failed to be sensitive to local cultural differences? 3. Could Ikea's decision to airbrush women form the catalog distributed in Saudi Arabia be interpreted as a willingness of the company to overlook the oppression of women in the country? Would it have made any difference if Ikea had included women in the catalog, but dressed them following Islamic tradition? 4. Discuss this situation using the concept of ethical relativism. 5. Did Ikea follow Richard DeGeorge's first guideline, "do no intentional harm" (see text for a full list of the guidelines), for companies that want to make ethical decisions when doing business across national boundaries? What would you have done differently