Analysis of an Ethical Dilemma - Assignment Example

? OVERVIEW: In contemporary politics, one of the hero's or most admired economists for people who believe that less government is better, is Milton Friedman. Friedman is considered the father of modern right-wing economics, and is responsible for the idea that the private sector can do what the public sector does, more efficiently. One of the most famous quotes of Friedman's, says that the obligation of a corporation ought to be solely focused on maximizing profits for its shareholders, therefore, a corporation has no legitimate reason to be concerned with ethics [Shaw, 2008, 178]. Prior to taking this course, I believed as Friedman maintained that the only purpose of business was to maximize 'self interest' and therefore, maximize profits. Since taking the course, I have begun to understand two important challenges to this Friedman idea of an 'ethics free' or 'ethics neutral' business approach. First, ethics and self interest are not necessarily at odds with one another. In other words, corporations all over the world are 'going green' or finding non-exploitive ways of extracting goods and services from the developing world. However, they are not doing so because they are singularly altruistic. Rather, they are doing so because the market is demanding this. The more consumers become more ethically aware, especially around global issues, the more they place those demands on the producers of goods and services that they consume [Asgary and Mitschow, 2002, 241]. Indeed, some individuals now consciously choose a product or service because of its ethical practices as compared with competitors for the very same service. Thus, one of the things that I have learned that really challenged some of my personal assumptions, was the idea that profit making and being ethical could be complimentary rather than antagonistic toward one-another. The other area that was learned in this course, concerns the actual evaluation of ethics and morals. If ethics concerns the right choice to make given a particular situation, then, 'meta-ethics' concerns the right ethical model for the problem or decision in question [Megone and Robinson, 2002, 2]. As a meta-ethical issue, there are three major models of ethics – namely, deontological, consequentialist/utilitarian and virtue ethics [Trevino and Nelson, 2010, 41ff.]. While it can be said that utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number) and deontological (golden mean or will only that which can be willed universally) are both formulas and almost quantifiable models, virtue ethics is different. Virtue ethics looks at the intrinsic worth of acting morally. Rather than applying a formula to a situation (utilitarianism and deontological), virtue ethics looks at what qualifies as an ethical individual, and in turn, looks at how an ethical or virtuous individual will evaluate a situation, and in turn, how they will decide on one option over and against an other. It is interesting to note that all three models can be applied to the very same case study or ethical problem, and the result or the outcome decision can be quite different. Thus, one of the areas that I was exposed to in this course, was the area of meta-ethics. That is, the view or analysis of different and competing models for understanding and interpreting ethical decisions or moral dilemmas. ETHICAL DILEMMA: In high-school, I had a job working in a retail store which had a low hourly wage, but a decent commission. My manager at that store, basically taught me that misleading the customer would produce better results. Further, while individuals were compensated for their particular sales, there was also a capital pool where profits were shared among employees for all sales. Thus, because of the commission situation, there was a profit incentive to be misleading and manipulative. The practice of misleading customers, however, never really sat well with me or that my “guts” [Trevino and Nelson, 2010, 58] were telling me that this was wrong. My dilemma was that I was doing something I knew was wrong, but also something that would help me profit which is why I took the job in the first-place. Gather the Facts: The facts are fairly straight-forward in this dilemma. The Company had a general set of guidelines on behavior, but was fairly general. While it did say that we ought to treat customers with respect and courtesy, it did not specifically state anything about misleading them. The manager was the person entirely responsible for my work. In other words, I did not interact with anyone above the manager, nor did I feel any obligation toward anyone else in the organization other than the manager. Therefore, the manager's own abuse of customers was essentially abuse coming from my superior. Finally, the situation was such that I was profiting, but also, that I could not safely say anything to anyone. Since I was only accountable to the Manager, and the head-office was in fact in a different country, there was no way I could act as a whistle-blower without suffering the consequences of loosing my job. Define the Ethical Issues: Stealing and lying were the basic moral issues at play in this problem. While it was a definite case of lying, it was not so definite that theft was going on. This is just implied in the case of those customers whose money we took under false pretenses about the products we were selling. Thus, the ethical issue in question asks, should I have been going along with what my manager told me to do which was unethical but profitable, or should I do the morally right thing and be honest, thereby, likely loosing my job in the process. Identify the Affected Parties: I was obviously affected, given that I was forced into an awkward position. The customers who were manipulated were probably the biggest victims in the situation. Finally, the head-corporation and its shareholders were unquestionably affected. In this latter situation, it is the potential damage that could be done to their reputation and their corporate brand or image that would be most impacted. While they are not directly affected, they had or have the potential of being severely affected as a consequence of the actions of my manager Identify the Consequences: The consequences in terms of customers, is that they may end up purchasing something that they didn't need, and something that didn't function as good as they were told. They had the potential of being the victims of the worst consequences, given that they are out money if the item does not live up their expectations or what they were told to expect. The potential consequences for the corporation were also pretty severe. They could loose a reputation that has taken them decades to build, and a loss of reputation would unquestionably impact the bottom line or effect the choices consumers make that could lead them toward finding alternative. The consequences for the manager or any of the staff, would likely have been termination. At the same time, it was the manager who scrutinized the behavior of staff and not the head office. So, in a sense, the consequences in terms of coming from the manager, are somewhat difficult to assess given that they would have first have to have been caught which is difficult because it is they that are supposed to the catching, so to speak. Identify the Obligations: There is a basic obligation to the customer, and that was outlined above in regard to the company mission statement and charter. There is also an obligation to the shareholders of the company, given that they own the business who is manipulating customers. I personally had an obligation to the manager, and it was him who was doing the cheating and manipulation, and moreover, it was the manager who was teaching and encouraging sales staff to do the very same. Consider your character & integrity: I was raised with some pretty strong morals, and had parents who emphasized being honest as an important virtue. Working under these circumstances was very difficult. It involved swallowing a lot of what I had been told or taught about being honest, and it was a stressful situation because I had a constant feeling of doing something wrong, even though the venture also turned out to be pretty profitable. My integrity has not really been the same ever since, given that I chose to work there in spite of knowing about how it made me feel. Think Creatively about Potential Actions: Creatively speaking, I probably should have been honest to the customers, but dishonest to that manager. In other words, make the manager believe that I am manipulating customers even though they are being worked with in a positive way. Another creative action, might be an anonymous tip to the head-office specifying what this manager was doing. It would have to be an anonymous tip given that I probably would have lost my job if I was the known complainer. Check your gut: My gut was essentially conflicted. Because of my upbringing, I most definitely had a gut feeling that deceiving customers was morally wrong. However, when I check my gut, so to speak, I also feel the twinge of greed and want. I basically went along with the cheating and manipulation, because it sounded lucrative which it turned out to be. However, my gut was continuously uneasy about the situation, and I found myself having anxiety attacks before having to show up for work at that retail store. Describe which ethical approach (consequentialist, deontological, or virtue) you think was taken by the individuals involved and why. In a sense, it can be argued that the manager took a deontological approach. It has to be qualified to say that he maintained not that he ought to will this action for everyone to do universally, but he did actually will it across all of the employees. Kant argued that we should only will for any given individual, that which we would will to everyone else [Jones, Parker, and ten Bos, 2005, 65]. In this case, the golden mean would not work because we could not or would not live in a world where everyone was actively manipulating and misrepresenting the truth. Consider, for example, what it would be like if your own physician conducted themselves the way in which this manager did. However, he did work within the 'universal' of the employees at the organization, and as a matter of elimination he was neither acting for the greater good for the greater number, and he was definitely not acting in any way from a virtue ethics model. Therefore, while it cannot be said that the manager was acting solely from an deontological vantage point, it is the model that suits best when considering his situation and also, the alternative ethical models. Review your analysis of the ethical dilemma and the information you have learned in this course. Did the organization respond appropriately? Why or why not? The corporation did not respond at all in this situation. However, they should have had a two-fold response: one would be to have fired the manager, and the other, would be to learn from the mistakes made and take actions accordingly. They ought to have had a re-training of the employees, and establish a set of 'core values' that would provide guidance for the employees. Further, they should have established a mechanism for whistle-blowing which is “reporting the misconduct of others” [Trevino and Nelson, 2010, 275]. That is, protect individuals who come forward to senior management with a problem that effects the profitability or stability of the company as a whole. While they did not respond, as this manager was never caught, it is still possible to articulate an adequate response to the situation. Works Cited: Asgary, Nader and Mitschow, Mark C.. 2002. “Toward a Model of International Business Ethics”. Journal of Business Ethics, Part 3, Vol. 36 Issue 3, p239-246, 8p. Jones, Campbell, Parker, Martin and ten Bos, Rene. 2005. For Business Ethics. London: Routledge. Megone, Chris and Robinson, Simon. 2002. Case Histories in Business Ethics. London: Routledge. Shaw, William. 2008. Business Ethics: A Textbook with Cases. Seventh Edition. Boston: Wadsworth. Trevino, Linda K. and Nelson, Katherine. 2010. Managing Business Ethics. Straight Talk About How to Do it Right. Fourth Edition. Hobokon: John Wiley & Sons. Business Ethics: Decision-making & an Ethical Dilemma. Read More