Question

Tyco International, a manufacturing company, sued its former CEO, Dennis Kozlowski, in regard to his receipt of unauthorized bonuses from the company profits. Among his other wrongdoings, Kozlowski awarded unauthorized special bonuses to himself and more than 40 other Tyco employees. In sum, he misappropriated from company funds over $100 million that he was not authorized to receive. Included in this misappropriation was the use of company funds for personal expenditures, such as $18 million to buy and redecorate his New York City apartment and $1 million for his wife's 40th birthday party, held on the Italian island of Sardinia. The extravagant party featured an ice sculpture of the statue of David urinating Stolichnaya vodka. Based on these and other corporate misdeeds in related criminal proceedings, Kozlowski is currently serving 8.33 to 25 years at the Mid-State Correctional Facility in New York. How do you think Kozlowski would have acted had he considered the public disclosure test before engaging in these corporate misdeeds? What if he applied the universalization test? [Tyco Intl, Ltd. v. Kozlowski, 2005 DNH 68; 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6867 (April 21, 2005).]

Answer 1

If Kozlowski would have applied the public disclosure test to his thoughts of misappropriation, I believe he would not have engaged in any wrongdoing. He would have thought of the consequences of the crime, and the embarrassment before he made the decision to misappropriate any funds he was not entitled to. If he would have applied the universalization test, he would have thought about the people who admired him and thought of him as a role model as well as his family