Read the below article: "The C.E.O. Who Stood Up to President Trump: Ken Frazier Speaks Out" The New York Times, February 19, 2018 Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/19/business/merck-ceo-ken-frazier-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness&action=click&contentCollection=business&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront Answer the following questions: How might have Ken Frazier’s actions been in the best interests of Merck? Is it easier for a top-level executive to speak out on a moral issue than one further down the corporate ladder?

Mr. Frazier's actions were in the best interest of Merck not only because his actions represented the values of the company to customers but also because eventually, other corporate leaders took the same steps. While he may have been alone in leaving the President's Advisory Council for a large part of the day he left, by the end of the day more people on the council were leaving for the same reasons. This makes him look strong and decisive since he led the charge to walk away from the council. As the first one to leave the council, Frazier also got additional media coverage for Merck.
The articles in the New York Times references Merck's decision to give away a medication that cured river blindness. Mr. Frazier says that was the impetus for the social responsibility Merck prides itself on. By leaving the President's Advisory Council in the wake of President Trump's comments about the Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Mr. Frazier was upholding those values of social responsibility. His actions, therefore, were good for the image of Merck in the eyes of the public.
Ultimately, it's easier for someone like Mr. Frazier to voice his opinion and take a stance on a moral issue than someone down the corporate ladder because he is the face of his company. He has no one above him to consult other than the board—who he did consult before taking a public stance. Someone lower on the corporate ladder would need to consider how the people above him would react; if he took a stance, he'd run the risk of losing his job. Many people lower on the chain of command might also feel that it's not their place to take a moral stance on an issue that would reflect on the company for which they work. Mr. Frazier, however, is able to make the decision to be the face of his company on moral issues.
https://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/22/world/merck-offers-free-distribution-of-new-river-blindness-drug.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/19/business/merck-ceo-ken-frazier-trump.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fbusiness&action=click&contentCollection=business®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront