Organizational Ethics: A Practical Approach - Essay Example

Student's Name Professor's Name Course Date Case Study 3 Synopsis For Tad Pierson, the question that constantly pops up in his mind is whether to fire Howard or not. Following his appointed three months ago as a project engineer at Agrigreen Inc., Pierson was tasked with the further responsibility of supervising the team that was in charge of plant survey. Being a familiar figure with quite a number of the teams in charge of plant survey, Tad Pierson is relatively aware of the group’s internal disputes. For this reason, Pierson is reviewing every group member including the history, work ethics, and performance of the surveying team. This is in order to determine whether the newly recruited workers are performing within the ethical and behavioral guidelines stipulated by Agrigreen Inc. In particular, Pierson is investigating the consequences of the past disputes involving the surveying team and trying to ensure that the affected members are fully committed to the firm. In this regard, Pierson’s investigation has, in turn, developed Howard Lineberry as a possible person of interest owing to his recent work output as well as performance. Lineberry who was hired by the organization 17 years ago works as the head surveyor for the firm and upon interaction with Tad Pierson, has happily reiterated his delight of working at Agrigreen as a surveyor. His 17-year stint at Agrigreen has seen him work with four different supervising personnel. Mel Cutler who was recruited to assist Howard Lineberry as his assistant expressed concerns that Lineberry has an incessant habit of taking numerous coffee breaks, shows laxity at work, and has poor communication strategies. Before Pierson was employed as Lineberry’s boss, he had worked with Mel Cutler on a certain project and had to listen to Cutler’s complains about Lineberry’s horrible work commitment. On similar circumstance, Tad Pierson meets with Dan Richards, a coworker and friend at Agrigreen and surprisingly enough, he too complains about how working with Howard is difficult and that if given a chance, he would immediately fire him. As if all these raised concerns about Howard are not enough, Butt who is Pierson’s boss has asked him to fully accept the duties of the engineers since on one of his regular visits to see Mel Cutler, he had come across Howard Lineberry sleeping on his desk during office hours. These ethical concerns about Howard are the issues that Pierson has to review before he can decide on what to do with Howard. Finding of Fact One Howard was accused of being disorganized and showing laxity at work by his 2nd manager, Paul Jackson. Due to his laziness, Howard made a huge error that resulted in the head surveyor missing the precise location of fixing the foundation of buildings. The repercussions were quite heavy for the organization since it caused the company a great fortune in terms of revenue allocated towards redressing the error. Additionally, the company wasted a lot of employee’s and contractor’s time who had to work within fixed deadlines in order to normalize the situation. Since Howard is the lead surveyor, it is his duty crosscheck and examines the work done by all the surveyors not to forget his own work. Due to the initial error made by Howard, Paul Jackson saw it fit to hire Dan Richards, an employee pursuing engineering to help Howard in double checking the surveyors’ work as well as with a recently launched project that would see the construction of a new pond for holding wastewater. While working with Lineberry, Richards complained that he was prone to making errors and was additionally slow and idiotic when it came to performing his duty. According to Jackson, these issues needed the additional recruitment of a sharp and experienced individual to assist Lineberry in his duty. In the long haul, Richards was transferred to the manufacturing section and who would have been happier than Howard to see him go. Recommendations 1 Howard Lineberry’s work performance/ethics, personality and competency should be the initial eye-opener to his manager, Tad Pierson. Regarding recommendations, I would first call Lineberry and politely counsel him by showing him his poor work ethics and performance in the past as observed by his supervisors. To enlighten him further on the gravity of the situation, I would particularly mention the huge error that he made when he missed the foundation location and consequently caused the company a loss of revenue that was pumped towards fixing the same. I would also explain to him that most of his supervisors have observed an unusual laxity in him whenever he is performing his duty thus, affecting his work output. This would help me clarify to him why an additional assistant was added by his former manager-to fix his incessant errors. Since his errors resulted in two employees being hired to perform the same task allocated to him, I would hint that he was now replaceable. This I believe would bring back his focus at work. To add to the above, I would ask him to sign a performance contract alongside the formal counseling paper. The performance contract would require him to adequate give more time and attention to his responsibilities in order to earn his monthly bonuses and benefits. Further, I would notify him that henceforth no assistants would be hired to help him do his jobs unless the project he was working on evidently needed one. This would cut the cost of paying more than one employee for a task that can be accomplished by one person as in Howard’s case. During the counseling sessions, I would note to him that the company would require bi-weekly updates on projects he was working on. Furthermore, he would be required to set up objectives for each project assigned to him and the company would expect him to meet them. Failure in doing the same would result in termination of his duties to the company. In order to meet his objectives, I would suggest to him to utilize the five conditions necessary for goal-settings. These would indubitably require an extra amount of effort. If he fails to put the extra energy needed to meet his goals he would consequently be replaced by an individual with better work ethics. Lastly, in order to conclusively follow up with Howard’s performance, I would put deadlines that he needed to meet for each project assigned. Additionally, for goals and projects adequately completed in time with no errors, I would reward him to boost his performance morale. Aside from reprimanding him on his recent work ethics, I would explain to him that he is an integral part of the company just like everyone else and that his input is really needed. I would also advise him to always develop detailed and well-organized work records that would come in handy whenever the company is doing a follow up on the performance of each employee. Tad Pierson would definitely see a reformed Howard if these recommendations are adopted. Finding of Fact 2 Mel Cutler and Howard Lineberry had enjoyed a healthy work relationship until recently when the former noticed that Howard lacked organizational ethics more so when it came to keeping notes on projects he was working on. Cutler was concerned since he knew that project notes are important tools needed by surveyors and any error on the notes would jeopardize not only the project but the organization as a whole. For this reason, Cutler tried unsuccessfully to remind Howard on how surveyors are trained by the company to take project notes. Howard still did not use the company’s recommended format for taking project notes. To further aggravate the situation, Lineberry seldom shared the work schedule with his assistant, Cutler and this affected his work performance since he did not know what was to be done for each project. Howard’s tendency of taking snack breaks more than was required also became a concern for an already frustrated Cutler. Cutler further noticed that despite numerous complaints from his former boss about his bad behavior at work, Lineberry did not give a hoot about other’s opinions on him. Eventually, Howard was transferred to a tad smaller office thus, giving him a “better working environment” than he initially had. In his new office space, he would take siestas after lunch and claim that since he worked up to late hours during most of the days, there was no offense in him sleeping during official working hours. Howard eventually lost the respect of his colleagues since his lateness at work also became a concern. Recommendations 2 To begin with, Tad Pierson has to acknowledge that moving Howard to a new office space was a mistake. Thus, I would recommend that he be moved back to his initial working zone in the plant. If need be, which in this case is already necessary, he is allocated a space adjacent to the office of the supervisor where he can be easily and regularly monitored. This I believe would not give the employees too much freedom at the expense of delivering their duties. I would also hold accountability meetings every morning when employees report for work. At the accountability meetings, I would request all surveyors to sign an official document that clearly stated whether a particular employee has been late for work more than thrice without giving prior notice to the concerned authorities or without an evidential emergency. The penalty for such gross misconduct would result in termination. Furthermore, I would sternly warn that taking naps during working hours or lunch breaks would form an immediate ground for suspension and if done more than once one could possibly be fired. I would also rewrite the company’s policy regarding breaks and further include the type of break and the amount of time needed for each. This new policy would be written in form of a memo and would be posted on all the notice boards available in the company’s vicinity. At the end of the memo would be the recommended penalty for any employee caught abusing the newly written guidelines. I would also highlight on the expectations the company has from each surveyor under its pay roll. Additionally, I would also advise that an employee’s past work ethics should not be an issue of discussion among colleagues since it could advance stigmatization. This would also mean that other people’s opinions about a given employee cannot be used as the only grounds to punish them. Instead, all the recommended parameters discussed in this paper will be used to investigate and determine whether dismissal or firing of a supervisor is necessary or not. In order to ensure no excuse is given by employees for jobs poorly done, I would ensure that the working environment for the surveyors is conducive would and well furnished with the needed tools to accomplish tasks. This would also ensure the working area is organized and able to reduce the backlog that would be strenuous for the supervisors. I would further require Howard to give me feedbacks since he is the head surveyor and is well versed with experiences needed for the position. Finding of Fact 3 Tad Pierson, Howard Lineberry’s manager has been advised by Dan Richards, a longtime high school friend to fire Howard. However, firing Howard would not be an easy fete to achieve since the process would involve a two year period of documentation. Tad knows this since in the past it took him two years to simply fire a single employee. Additionally, to Pierson, firing an employee with over 17 years of work experience with the company is way more than he can take. Also, with a glaring reality that Howard has a family back at home that depends on is income for sustenance, Tad is in a serious ethical dilemma. Tad Pierson’s boss, Burt also recently found Lineberry sleeping on his desk during working hours when he went visit Mel Cutler. Recommendations 3 Despite the ethical considerations involved in determining whether it is necessary to fire Howard or not, I would point that an individual’s rank in a given organization cannot be used as a benefit of a doubt when it comes to questioning his/her work ethic and commitment. Additionally, in as much as Howard has spent 17 years with Agrigreen, the fact that for all that while he has not moved to more advanced positions in the company shows that his work input has been in doubt. Thus, the question that should be asked is how many years he has done his work correctly. Most importantly, an individual who knows that he has a family that depends on his income should be wise enough to realize that taking his job less seriously could lead to his dismissal thus jeopardizing the future of his family. The lack of trust that his past manager had in him compelled him to employ a junior and sharp individual to double-check Howard’s work. This is in light of the fact that Howard Lineberry was a veteran employee as compared to Dan Richards. Thus, I believe that allowing the time spent with an organization by an employee whose work ethic is in question is tantamount to adding salt to an injurious wound. From personal experiences, a co-worker at Walmart where I work had to be fired since he failed to heed my advice on how goods should be properly procured. Being his junior, he felt I had no moral authority to advise him yet upon his dismissal I was fully given his responsibilities as Walmart’s procurement officer. For this reason, I believe an employee’s experience at a given firm should act like a wall that prevents him from making mistakes and not the reason that he makes mistakes. According to Johnson in his book Organizational Ethics, moral development and ethical behavior within an organization requires each individual to show respect to authority and abide by a firm’s policies and codes of conduct (202). Additionally, Johnson reiterates that it is the responsibility of highest stakeholders in an organization to affirm these codes of conduct principles. Thus, letting employees like Howard exist in a given institution will eventually result in constant insubordination from other employees alike Sember (98) concurs with this notion that any employee who shows tendencies of defying orders is like a malignant tumor that needs to be removed. Such employees are a bad example to hardworking and committed employees. However, before dismissing such individuals, it is imperative to consider other factors such as internal disputes among coworkers. Since some accusations against other employees may be arising due to jealousy from their colleagues. You are surprised to find that some employees are only out there to defame the reputation of performing workers in order to benefit from their dismissal (Pearson & Robbins 180). In summary, these are the factors that need to be investigated and considered before firing or counseling Howard Lineberry. References Education, Null Pearson, and Stephen P. Robbins. Organizational behavior: international edition. Pearson Education India, 2011. Johnson, Craig E. Organizational Ethics: A Practical Approach. , 2016. Print. Sember, Terrance. Bad Apples: How to Manage Difficult Employees, Encourage Good Ones to Stay, and Boost Productivity. Cincinnati: F+W Media, 2010. Internet resource Read More