3Qs: Taking stock of Walmart

The New York Times recently pub­lished an in-​​depth report alleging that top offi­cials at Walmart’s head­quar­ters in Ben­tonville, Ark., quashed an internal inves­ti­ga­tion into a sus­pected $24 mil­lion bribery scandal at the retailer’s Mex­ican sub­sidiary. We asked Harlan Platt, a finance pro­fessor in the Col­lege of Busi­ness Admin­is­tra­tion, to examine the scandal’s fallout.

Finance professor Harlan Platt called Walmart a "huge cash flow-generating machine."

Walmart, which saw its stock tumble 5 percent one day after the scandal broke, employs approximately 1 percent of the American workforce. Is the company simply too big to fail?

Failure to Walmart is absolutely unthinkable — it is a huge cash-flow-generating machine. With that said, the bribery scandal in Mexico is an unintended consequence of two things: one, the quest for continued growth, and two, the challenge of reinvesting the massive cash flow generated by its operations —approximately $24 billion last year. Management’s challenge is to recognize this unintended consequence and walk the fine line to ensure ethical and financial performance.

How could the bribery scandal in Mexico affect the company’s expansion into other foreign markets?

I suspect that this scandal will only play to the home market and will not affect future expansion internationally. I’ve noticed, for example, that small-business advocates in New York City are trying to use the Mexican scandal to their advantage as they seek to keep Walmart out of the city. Developing countries, for a number of reasons, are likely to disregard this scandal: They are more interested in growth and jobs and they have less open press and media.

Where does this crisis rank among other Walmart scandals, which include allegations of using sweatshops, hiring illegal workers and intentionally selling products at low cost to subvert competitors?

Walmart has worked hard in the last decade to improve its ethical performance. Notable among these efforts are its drive to push the farms in America to organic production and its offering of some form of health insurance for its workers. While people argue that the move to organic is selfish and driven by profit potential and that the health care is inadequate, Walmart began these initiatives on its own and should be applauded. This scandal will probably fall onto the shoulders of one or only a few employees and therefore will be less harmful to the image of Walmart than previous scandals.


  1. There is an unjus­tice and exploita­tion of the people who could most ben­efit from the cost of low prices, which Wal­mart touts. Why are Amer­i­cans and the rest of the global market ignoring Wal­marts busi­ness prac­tices? Are they merely weighing the cost-​​benefit of shopp­ping at, working for, or selling mer­chan­dise at the big box store? It seems like sup­porters are com­pla­cent to ALL the neg­a­tive effects (envi­ron­mental, mental, emo­tional, employee treat­ment, cus­tomer rela­tions, soci­etal, com­pli­ancy, exploita­tion, bribery, etc.) of this store.

  2. Among the one or few employees pos­sibly involved is Walmart’s Pres­i­dent and CEO, who, according to the Times article, “received a detailed account of the Mex­ican bribery alle­ga­tions in 2005, when he was in charge of Wal­mart Inter­na­tional and ulti­mately respon­sible for Mex­ican oper­a­tions.” That char­ac­ter­i­za­tion has not been con­firmed or dis­proved. In the mean­time, are we to assume the B-​​school advice for future exec­u­tives is “min­i­mize, min­i­mize min­i­mize (to put it kindly) and hope every­thing blows over?”

Post a comment

4 + 2 =

Comments are moderated.
Please view our comment guidelines.

About news@Northeastern

News@Northeastern is Northeastern University’s primary source of news and information. Whether it happens in the classroom, in a laboratory, or on another continent, we bring you timely stories about every aspect of life, learning and discovery at Northeastern. Contact the news team

Subscribe to daily news email

Connect with us