The best policy is that he talks with the CEP of other firms in order to join him in the attempt to reduce corruption and bribery in the industry. Although many CEOs might not want to join this cause as it might mean reduction in their profits but a lot of other people who care about the ethical issues will join hands with him.
He can convince that other CEOs by stating that utilitarianism requires them to act in this way. By utilitarianism we mean that positive and negative consequences of an action should be consider and if some action is yield more positive consequence for the society than negative consequence, then that action should be taken immediately. And since reducing the corruption in the industry in the interest of the society and the company, this action should be taken. Whereas if they allow the corruption and bribery to prevail in the industry, then only the company will benefit and hence it is better to reduce the corruption in the society from utilitarianism framework. This will also yield the benefits other companies in the long run as without corruption and bribery existent in the industry, they will be able to win contracts on merit and corruption expenditure will be reduced which will be contributed in the profitability of the industry.
Similarly, we can assess whether this action by Fluor and other companies from the deontology framework is worth taking or not. Deontological ethic framework suggests that morality requires that certain actions are wrong even if the outcomes of these actions are good. For example, bribery and corruption may lead to high profits for the company, but since these actions are immoral, these actions are really wrong and no company should indulge in corruption and bribery.
Similarly, Mr. Fluor can also convince the other CEO by supporting his point of view with the goodwill associated with the ethical actions of a country. Since, the