Q4 (a) An organization’s culture characterizes the best possible approach to act inside the

organization. This culture comprises of shared convictions and qualities set up by pioneers
and afterward imparted and fortified through different techniques, at last molding worker
observations, practices and comprehension. Organizational culture sets the context for
everything an enterprise does. An organizational culture tends to emerge over time, shaped
by the organization's leadership and by actions and values perceived to have contributed to
earlier successes. A company culture can be managed through the cultural awareness of
organizational leaders and HR professionals.
Boldness is at the core of our culture. So its natural that we should want to encourage and
lend profile to businesses that demonstrate the attributes that underline so much of what we
do. In this volatile and unpredictable environment , the need for business to be bold has never
been greater.
Our road map starts with our mission, our company recognizes that while honesty and
integrity are essential ingredients of a strong and stable enterprise , profitability provides the
main spark of economic activity. JJ steel strives to strengthen Pakistan’s industrial base
through effective utilization of staff and material. The means envisaged to this are cutting
edge technology and high productivity consistent with modern management practices.
We thrive in a culture of respect, inclusion and diversity. At JJ steel we have made a
conscious effort to build an equitable environment and diverse leadership team. JJ steel has
always been a pioneering and enlightened employer. We recognizes that our people give us
competitive edge . Across the globe , our team have a healthy mix not just gender and age but
also culture ethnicity and a myriad of such other aspects. We strongly believe that our people
are our greatest assets. We also endeavor to nurture a culture of diversity, innovation , total
quality management and employer care and respect. As a matter of fact we believe that
diversity within workforce greatly enhances our overall capabilities.
In all our global operating locations we pride ourselves on being an equal opportunity
employer and not discriminating on the basis of cast, color, creed, language etc. Employees
policies and practices are administrated in a manner that ensures all decisions relating to
promotion , compensation and any other form of reward and recognition based truly on merit.
We organize structured workshops for every level of workforce. To promise diversity and
inclusion , we hold workshops for our senior leadership to help them understand the
importance of diverse workforce. We also organize workshops for middle management to
help them leverage the potential of diverse workplace and employ an inclusive approach in
business strategy. We are also organizing scholarship programmes for women in engineering
universities , thereby creating opportunities for them to join JJ steel. Career growth for
employees has been a main focus of JJ steel.

Q4(b) the key forces are following :

1. People: people make up the organization. Without people there is no concept of
organization. The organization is the combination of different people and it is
important for managers to must handle the all people of the organization.
2. Structure: structure defines the formal relationship and use of people in the
organization. There are managers and employees to accomplish different kind of
activities. No organization can be successful without proper organization. Many firms
have moved from traditional structure to team based structure.
3. Technology : in current situation technology is the most important factors among all.
Technology has increased the productivity of many firms. Technology allows people
to work more efficiently. Technology decreases per unit cost and improve quality of
work .
 4. Environment : organizations don’t exist alone . They work in an particular
environment. There are many factors which influence the organization like
competition , government etc. they must be socially responsible to their citizens or
persons related to them.
5. Demographic factors: demographic include socio-economic background, education
and age etc. Organizations prefer people with good socio-economic backgrounds as
they are believed to be performing better than others.
6. Social Changes: social changes also effects the organization in term of people needs
and wants. Social changes have taken place due to many factors like urbanization ,
education and international impact due to new information sources. These effect the
people working in the organization so it is essential to address these issues.

Q3 Richard Grasso was chief executive of NewYork stock exchange from 1995-2003. He
started in 1968 when he was hired by exchange as a floor check. After the corporate
scandals that dominated the headlines seventeen years ago, bringing down some of
the biggest names in American business, every company in the country could read
the writing on the wall: governance would be a sensitive issue for some time to
come; executive compensation would be under intense scrutiny; board
independence would be increasingly important. So how did the New York Stock
Exchange, the board on which most of the largest companies are traded, remain
oblivious to the changing public mood? How did it allow itself, only months later,
to become embroiled in a controversy involving an astronomical payment to its
CEO and apparently lax oversight from a board of dubious autonomy?
Those were the questions public relations professionals were asking this week after
NYSE chief executive Richard Grasso was forced to resign as questions about his
compensation—and his handling of those questions—made his position at the helm
of one of the world’s largest and most financial institutions increasingly untenable.
By the end of the week, there were even more questions, as critics of the Exchange
began to ask whether its trading model was fundamentally flawed.
“Dick Grasso’s downfall was the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand,” says
Michael Weiser, president of The Weiser Group. “It was the opening competitors
and critics of the NYSE have been waiting for. The NYSE’s historic opposition to
trading floor automation, its heavy-handed approach to competitive issues,
controversial regulatory issues and questionable governance decisions had created
a long list of those willing to pounce when the opportunity arose.”
Grasso had demonstrated his tin ear once before, when Grasso came under fire in
March when he nominated Citigroup chief executive Sanford Weill to become one
of the exchange’s so-called “public” members—on the board to represent the best
interests on investors—after Citigroup’s Salomon Smith Barney unit had agreed to
pay $400 million to settle allegations that it misled investors with tainted stock
research. Weill later withdrew.
In the wake of that brouhaha, the Securities & Exchange Commission asked
various exchanges, including the NYSE, to study their own corporate governance
practices and report on the findings. “If you’re going to set standards for other
people, you’ve got to set standards for yourself,” said SEC chairman William
Donaldson.
Grasso was reappointed chairman in June, and on August 27 the Exchange made
its first public disclosure of his compensation, indicating that he would collect
$139.5 million in deferred retirement benefits and a pay package of at least $2.4
million this year. Carl McCall, chairman of the compensation committee, said the
NYSE board felt Grasso was worth the money, and that the release of the pay
figures was part of a broader NYSE effort to improve transparency. But Donaldson
—himself a former NYSE chairman—expressed concern.
Donaldson asked for more details of Grasso’s compensation, and on September 8
the NYSE board acknowledged that Grasso was entitled to an additional $48
million in future compensation. Some board directors said they were surprised by
the additional compensation, with one member telling reporters that Grasso’s
employment contract was so complex it was difficult to decipher his deferred
compensation. The announcement prompted some to question whether Grasso
could remain.
The New York Times noted that Grasso has done the impossible: “Making Wall
Street gasp in astonishment at someone else’s compensation.”
With reporters clamoring for access to 1,200 pages of documents relating to the
chairman’s retirement package, the NYSE said it would restrict distribution of
those documents “in the interests of saving the world’s forests.” A day later, the
Exchange changed its mind, saying it would make available documents specifically
requested by reporters. Each news organization was allowed to send two reporters
to the exchange to examine the documents for two hours. The reporters could take
notes but couldn’t take documents or make copies of them.
According to The Wall Street Journal, “Many news organizations said they were
convinced it was a ploy by the Big Board to hide bad news, especially when the
information would likely become public at some point through a Freedom of
Information Act request.”
Said Stephen Shepher, editor in chief of BusinessWeek, “They are compounding
their stupidity. All it does is foster the further impression they are covering
something up. Any crisis manager would tell you, if you have bad news, get it all
out at once, and they are following that advice in reverse. It is dribbling out and the
controversy lingers and lingers and lingers.”
“The NYSE has always been about as transparent as the Kremlin but today the
intrigue and secrecy reached new heights,” said Thor Valdmanis, senior Wall
Street reporter for USA Today
Robert Zito, the NYSE’s executive vice president for communications responded
that the NYSE was under no obligation to make the documents public in the first
place. “There is nothing to hide. We did not have to do this,” he told reporters. 
A week later, the heads of four of America’s largest public pension funds,
representing combined assets of $401 billion, called on Grasso to step down. Said
California state treasurer Phil Angelides, “This pay package is out of line and it’s
part of a sickness of culture in this country where too many at the very top have
forgotten what’s right and fair in the American economy and what average workers
make in this country.”
The next day, Grasso was gone.
His decline and fall seemed to happen overnight, but some observers felt his fate
was sealed by earlier missteps and a failure to understand changing expectations.
“Grasso was a good leader, fostering growth and a series of operational and
organizational improvements for the NYSE,” says Rich Taubmann, senior vice
president and head of the investor relations practice at The MWW Group. “But he
quickly became the latest scandal de jour for the investment community and
media. 
“His previous missteps serving on corporate boards and mishandling the Weill
appointment put some chinks in his integrity. The announcement of this enormous
pay package was the final straw; made worse by the fact that it was approved by a
NYSE board comprised of heads of companies he oversaw. His imperial-style help
and communications missteps assured that this would be his downfall.”
Critics say the Big Board is governed for and by a small group of specialists,
members, regional brokerages and listed companies should be long gone. The
previous head of the NYSE’s compensation committee was Kenneth Langone of
Home Depot, whose board Grasso sat on. Many of the other Big Board directors
were chosen by Grasso.
But others believe it was the cover-up (or at least the appearance of a cover-up)
that did more harm than the crisis.
“Grasso would have likely survived the pay issue,” says Evan Goetz, senior vice
president in the New York office of international investor relations firm Financial
Dynamics. “However, once the news of the additional $48 million package broke,
that PR disaster is what ultimately caused this chain of events.”
The failure to disclose the additional $48 million in the initial disclosure, couple
with the NYSE’s decision to restrict access to compensation documents, created
the impression there was something to hide, and prolonged the crisis.
“The compensation issue was the key factor leading to Grasso’s resignation,” says
Taubmann. “The sheer size and the fact that the NYSE is a non-profit, quasi-
regulatory body made it lethal in the post-Enron era.”
But Grasso’s “cavalier attitude surrounding the issue, his failure to adequately
address questions in a timely fashion and the NYSE board’s seeming incompetence
on the matter just hastened his demise and brought a panoply of other NYSE
activities under the spotlight,” Taubmann adds.
“The decision to limit media access to Grasso’s employment contract immediately
created an air of skepticism,” adds Goetz. “Skepticism about the exchange’s desire
for open sharing of information, for transparency—the very principles that NYSE
listed companies are required to abide by. The resulting press coverage, from The
Wall Street Journal on down, captured the confusion of the day down to the minute
detail, which negatively affected public perception of the situation and quickly
became a communication debacle.”
Like many of his corporate peers, Grasso seemed shocked that anyone would
question whether he was worth all those millions.
“In public relations, hubris kills,” says Weiser. “The lack of contrition exhibited by
Grasso in the course of answering serious questions about the size of his
compensation package and the governance process that awarded it to him fueled
his critics and made him a juicy tabloid target. Once he became a punch line, it was
too late.”
Says Peter Hirsch, who heads the corporate practice at Porter Novelli, “Grasso
should have known that in the harsh light of the post-Enron era that his
compensation package would cause an uproar. The NYSE board, no stranger to
controversy at this point, should have undertaken a thorough review of every
perception issue and figured out that they needed to persuade Grasso to renegotiate
his package.”
Given his past performance, many observers were surprised that he failed to grasp
the severity of his situation.
“Grasso had been a master of communications, effectively raising his and the
NYSE’s profile while making himself a media star with frequent interviews and
stunts like the bell-ringing photo-ops with celebrities,” says Taubmann. “In this
instance he did not quickly enough grasp the importance of the story and
understand the impact on his key constituencies. He retreated to the bunker,
pretended this was not a big issue and saw his goodwill with the media quickly
evaporate. 
“The bumbling NYSE board did not help matters but Grasso seriously
miscalculated the depth of the problem and his need to deal with it effectively. He
did not get out in front of the news, allowing the media to focus on the huge
numbers of his pay package and past missteps rather than all he had done for the
NYSE. A quicker give back of compensation or charitable contribution may also
have helped.”
If there’s one thing on which public relations experts are agreed, it’s that Grasso’s
resignation will not kill the larger story.
“While normal crisis management wisdom indicates that the forced resignation of
Richard Grasso should ease the media pounding the NYSE has sustained over the
past weeks, nothing of the kind will take place,” says Al Tortorella, veteran crisis
counselor and head of the corporate practice at Ogilvy Public Relations
Worldwide. “The Grasso palaver over pay is just Act One of a Wall Street morality
play. Act Two is a revised board. Act Three is more control by the SEC.”
In particular, questions about the Exchange’s board of directors are likely to
intensify.
“The mishandling of the compensation matter by Grasso and the NYSE Board has
unleashed a wider assault on the Exchange,” says Taubmann. “Legislators,
regulators and the media all joined the fray and as Grasso inevitably resigned the
focus was already turning to reforming the institution. 
“Governance, trading methods, organizational operations and technology are all
now being hotly debated. Grasso’s replacement will need to be someone from
outside the NYSE with a reputation beyond reproach.  It will likely be someone
with a government or regulatory background.”
Grasso’s resignation “has created a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve
the Exchange’s commitment and ability to serve the public interest,” says Muriel
Siebert, chief executive of Siebert Financial and the first woman to own a seat on
the NYSE. “But if the board and management of the exchange close ranks and
resist further change, investors will know that they can expect business as usual in
the post-Grasso era.”
There are two important immediate challenges for the Exchange, says Gordon
McCoun, senior managing director at Financial Dynamics. “First, it has to repair
the immediate damage to the credibility of the management of the Exchange.
Second, it has to justify the auction market as a legitimate market structure.”
The first order of business, says McCoun, is to appoint an appropriate successor.
That individual “will need to have a high level grasp of the financial markets and
an unimpeachable reputation for candor and fairness.”
“Not all CEOs or famous businessmen are anathema to the media and regulators,”
Tortorella says. “Some, like Warren Buffett, Robert Rubin, and John Chambers
should immediately be recruited to put the issue of pay into perspective and defend
the soundness of the NYSE. The exchange should also fund an advertising
campaign directed to major cities and Capitol Hill since the SEC and Congress will
be the most important participants in the NYSE’s future”
(As this story went to press, the Exchange announced that it had hired John Reed,
former chief executive of Citibank, as interim head. )
Peter Hirsch goes even further.
“This is one more example of something that starts as a crisis of trust becomes a
crisis of legitimacy,” he says. “The board needs to decide whether it should resign
en masse and be reconstituted in a dramatic way or for individuals to quietly not
receive renewed terms while the process of restoring the legitimacy of the
institution gets underway, because it is the legitimacy of the institution that is
under threat.”
However the board is reformulated, the new directors should not be insiders. “The
proposal put forth by Goldman Sachs’ Henry Paulson to exclude executives of
securities firms and listed companies from the Exchange’s Board would be a step
in the right direction,” McCoun believes.
Taubman agrees. The NYSE board will need to be reformed “with less emphasis
on Wall Street heads. This was a wake-up call for the way the NYSE operates from
A-to-Z and one should expect lots of changes in an effort to restore credibility,
while Grasso takes his leadership skills to a lucrative private-sector assignment.”
The new leadership, both the chief executive and the board, will have to address
some larger questions.
“There is an argument that the NYSE, as an auction market, is inherently less
efficient for executing trades than Nasdaq, a dealer market,” says McCoun. “This
question has existed for some time, but the level of the debate has been elevated by
the investigation into the specialists’ activities, which has created the perception
that there is a group of privileged people on the floor of the exchange that are
profiting from the institution without providing a valuable service.”
To defend the auction model, “the NYSE should carry out an information
campaign that publicizes the execution strength of the Exchange,” says McCoun.
“The point will have to be made that investors benefit from the auction model,
where stocks trade in one location and there is human intervention to ensure fair
execution of trades.
“During the boom and bust of the recent market cycle, the NYSE has remained
competitive with Nasdaq in attracting new listings because it has convinced
corporate managements that their shares will be traded efficiently and volatility
minimized. The same case needs to be taken to the investing public in a way that is
comprehensible to the average person.”
Clearly, there are challenges ahead, but most experts are confident the New York
Stock Exchange will emerge intact and possibly even strengthened by the crisis,
provided it embraces change and listens to legitimate criticisms.
“The NYSE is one of the few business organizations in the world that has a
reservoir of goodwill from which to draw,” says Weiser. “Clearly, it needs to
address its critics but its biggest mistake would be act too quickly in initiating
reforms that will be a model for U.S. corporations. The most important thing it can
do is to make its reform process as transparent as possible. It should not be afraid
of criticism. Rather, its goal must be to avoid inviting cynicism.”

Q1(a) I want to clarify my position on the controversy created by Mr Beedi regarding the
gift I received on November 22 2020 . Mr Allen is our valuable customer from past 20
years. I am working in this firm when it started . Mr Allen wanted to withdraw his some
money urgently due to emergency issue in his home. As he is our one of the loyal and
 valuable customer. So , I decide to help him and got his paper work done quickly. So
when he came today he gave me a gift. Due to the old relations with the company and me
I have to receive the gift. I received the gift so he will be coming again in our firm
because customer relationship is very much important in businesses. I was doing in in the
interest of the company. I don’t consider it unethical at all because I had not taken any
bribe to do some thing which is not in favor of the firm and I am not taking any comission
from Mr Allen. Relationship with customers are built for company’s larger interest. I
hope that I have clarified my position in this matter.

Q2(b) In this case apparently it seems to be the matter of fraud and corrupt practices.
But , a thorough investigation should be done in this matter. Investigation is important
and in the company’s interest . mounting allegation on the employee without any proof
will create negative perception among employees and will create uncertainty among
employees. I will start an investigation in company also and I will conduct investigation
under Pakistan company act 2017. Corruption and fraud is intolerable in the firm. It will
hit badly the company’s image and our business will be in loss. I will also inform the
higher management regarding this issue and proper surveillance will be done on accused.
But without solid proofs and evidences I will not take a single step against accused. After
proper investigation I will be able to take any further action because this whole exercise
is done in the interest of the company not to defame someone.
Q3. Egalitarianism is a trend of thought in political philosophy. An egalitarian favors
equality of some sort: People should get the same, or be treated the same, or be treated as
equals, in some respect. An alternative view expands on this last-mentioned option:
People should be treated as equals, should treat one another as equals, should relate as
equals, or enjoy an equality of social status of some sort. Egalitarian doctrines tend to rest
on a background idea that all human persons are equal in fundamental worth or moral
status.
First off, the problem with egalitarianism is that the thing with genders is that they are, by
nature, different. Men have more testosterone, women have their time of the month, women
tend to be confusing to men, men tend to infuriate women, men tend to keep all of their
emotions to themselves to seem more masculine etc, etc. That’s not even mentioning the on
average different interests in careers and hobbies, and women having babies which most of
them chose to look after at home (not ignoring single parents and stay at home fathers too,
they deserve way more credit than what they get) The point is, the genders are different, so
treating them the exact same way is bound to have problems. It’s a sad truth, but it’s the truth.

Another problem is people who don’t even know what that means. You hear online all the
time about crazy feminists, who may be good intention-ed, but their thoughts tend to get a
little skewed to say the least. Not ignoring dudes who think that every women who is a
feminist is automatically that type of person, even if they are actually what they claim to be.
Both sides have one thing in common, they aren’t actually supporting egalitarianism, they’re
just calling it that while really they’re supporting misogyny or misandry. Both sides make the
rest of their respective gender look bad.
Lets take the example of Shah Alam market known as Shalmi which is one of the biggest
market in Lahore. The shopkeepers there are paying a lot of tax as compared to the
shopkeeper who are running their businesses in rural areas. People running their businesses in
rural areas are paying minimum amount of taxes as compared to shalmi shopkeepers.
Egalitarianism states that both should have equal rights like good infrastructure , health
facilities etc. but I think this not right the one who is paying more taxes and earning more
income should have more rights to enjoy.
Sources :
1. https://www.provokemedia.com/
2. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-
samples/toolkits/pages/understandinganddevelopingorganizationalculture.aspx
3. https://corporate.arcelormittal.com/about-us/culture
4. https://www.tatasteel.com/
5. https://www.boldbusiness.com/human-achievement/bold-leadership-what-does-it-
comprise/
6. https://www.ukessays.com/essays/business/a-case-study-of-the-coca-cola-
company-business-essay.php
7. https://plato.stanford.edu/
8. https://www.iedunote.com/
9. builtin.com/