Corporate Governance and Ethical Responsibility - Essay Example

? Corporate Governance and Ethical Responsibility: One of the most successful approaches in management is stakeholder perspective. This is because there is integration in areas such as human resource management and strategic management. However, the manager should be able to identify a stakeholder and determine how and to what extent a stakeholder should be satisfied. Therefore, Doctor DoRight as a medical executive needs to distinguish between an internal and an external stakeholder. Internal stakeholders are those parties that have a substantial and direct influence on the running of an institution. Internal stakeholders in a hospital include the patients, the medical staff and management of the hospital and the board of governors or trustees. External stakeholders are those parties that have minimal often indirect influence on the management of the hospital. External stakeholders may include the relatives of the patients and other potential patients to the hospital. Other external stakeholders include the federal government and other hospital of the same class and category (Lebeer, 2002). The most basic function a medical executive should perform in regard to satisfying al stakeholders is controlling, directing staffing and organizing. For the patients, however, Doctor DoRight has the role of democratizing medical services so that all the patients get equal treatment. Equal treatment encompasses equitable distribution of the hospitals resources. For instance, in the case of organ transplant, hospitals can device methods such as receiving an organ in regard to the severity of the situation. The board of trustees expects that the medical executive prevents the occurrence of law suits, which may tarnish the name of the hospital and cost it a lot of money, that result from the action of hospital employees. Trustees also expect that the president maintains low labor turnover and an excellent cooperate image is paramount. The staff of the hospital expects respect from patients and fellow staff despite their position. Also, the staff expects fairness in remunerated, and adequate timely pay and a safe, conducive working environment (Lebeer, 2002). Potential customers need to feel welcomed to the hospital hence the need for an operational call centre and an efficient customer service. Recently hospitals have also taken on the craze of advertising their products to potential customers. Though an external stakeholder, the federal government, has a strong influence on the running of hospitals. The governments influence is greater when it comes to the legal obligations of the hospital. For instance, the government may insist that a hospital only use FDA approved drugs. The government, in America, may also specify the types of procedures that a hospital cannot carry out for instance euthanasia is illegal in most states. Competition between rival hospitals is inevitable, with their current status as potential business entities. However, there are certain procedures that must remain intact so as to maintain peaceful coexistence. For instance, a hospital can seek transfer of a patient to another hospital even if they are competing. Doctor DoRight should ensure that there is no slandering of another hospital by his staff through words or actions (Lebeer, 2002). There are six guiding principles that doctor should adhere to in their disbursement of services. These principles include a) Honesty and truthfulness b) Respect for persons c) Justice d) Autonomy e) Beneficence and f) Non-maleficence. These principles mostly guide doctor patient relationships but can also act as a basis for the actions of medical executives. In trying to satisfy the various stakeholders, the manager of the hospital, may experience conflict of interest when the needs of the two stakeholders clash. A good example of a clash of interest is on the issue of euthanasia. The reality of the effects of diseases such as Alzheimer’s is real and devastating. Most patients and families prefer that in the horrid stages of the disease, with a little dignity left to spare, doctors should assist the patient to part from the world peacefully. With this preference, the patients and the family are utilizing the principle of autonomy. Doctor DoRight in this case faces three possible approaches. First, he should respect the wishes of the patient. Secondly, he should consider the principles of beneficence which dictates that a medical practitioner has the duty to get the patient well. However, Alzheimer’s has no cure, and it is irreversible. Thirdly, there is the principle of Non-maleficence which dictates that the medical practitioner should not harm the patient. Most patients consider euthanasia more helpful than it is harmful. However, the laws against assisted suicide prohibit such actions in all but three states namely Montana, Oregon and Washington. As such, even if the moral obligations of the doctor, backed by these six principles prevail, the law prohibits the doctor from acting (Ledlow, 2011). In view of the six ethical principles, doctor DoRight took an ethical stand when he reported the illegal procedures to his seniors. This is because he observed the principle of honesty and truthfulness through disclosure. In the event that he kept this matter a secret, he would take full responsibility for the consequences therein. Secondly, through his actions, he sought justice for his patients in regard to receiving fair and legally approved medical care. Thirdly, he sought to counter maleficence which resulted in the wrongful death of patients in the hospital. Ensuring that the executive committee was aware of the situation enable them to identify the looming of potential law suits and, therefore, take steps such as investigating the situation to prepare themselves (Morrison, 2011). From the report, one can deduce that the problem lies with the employees of the hospital. This problem can result from the lack of clear strategic policies in the hospitals management. In view of this, Doctor DoRight can implement a strategy that creates a clear flow of authority such that procedures get approval before hand. This ensures that there is someone liable for wrongful death due to a procedure. Also, close supervision of the activities of the hospital will ensure that the staff performs according to set rules and regulations. These steps will ensure that patients are prone to as little harm as possible. Secondly, there is a possibility that the staff is not aware of the legality of some of the procedures they undertake. As such, the hospitals management can provide training aimed at enlightening the doctors and nurses. This reduces liability to the trustees because the choice to perform an illegal procedure will solely rest on the negligence of the staff and not the inadequacy of the hospital as a whole. As to why the doctor has so much responsibility, but lacks the capacity or is unwilling to carry out a direct analysis of the problems, constitutes an ethical dilemma (Ledlow, 2011). The deontological principle dictates that fulfilling ones duties in regard to the position they hold in society constitutes ethical behavior. Kant, the phenomenal philosopher, viewed the act of honoring commitment as a moral stance and, therefore, deemed it ethical (Morrison, 2011). Doctor DoRight carries out his duties as an administrator which includes business development, customer services, human resource management, safeguarding the legal interests of the hospital and patient advocacy. Through the adequate performance of these actions, he complies with the deontological principle. Doctor DoRight is first a doctor then an administrator. Though this report does not explicitly imply so, most professionals tend to protect their own in the midst of a crisis. The actions of his fellow members of staff are terrible because they go against medical ethics principles. It is his duty as an administrator to correct this wrongs. However, in light of the steps he took to address the situation, he does so much as to save his own career but not to safeguard the lives of patients. In his duty of creating a positive corporate image, and, thereby, appease the board of trustees he scores highly. This is evident when he receives award for Medical Business Executive of the Year. In view of this situation, one can conclusively argue that the doctor takes on a Utilitarian approach to leadership. Utilitarianism is also a philosophically founded ethical guiding theory advanced by J. S. Mill. Utilitarianism holds that the intentions of the individual do not matter. Instead, what matters are the results of the actions (Morrison, 2011). Granted, reporting the inefficiency of the hospital staff to the compliance manager may not be a purely selfless act. However, the result is that the management is aware of the inefficiency. Making the management aware of discrepancies in the running of the hospital is the duty of the president of the hospital which Doctor DoRight has done despite any hidden agendas. In the course, of employment individuals seek to advance their careers. In the event that this need coincides with the objectives of the organization, then the individual is lucky. The board of trustees in most instances seeks to maintain a worthwhile corporate image in the face of the stiff competition from other hospitals. Winning the Medical Business Executive of the Year award can constitute a personal motive. However, in winning the award, Doctor DoRight has drawn positive attention to the hospital in regard to corporate image. The role of a manger takes a more complicated spin than that of a clinician. Therefore, it is imperative that a manager focuses on the consequences resulting from their actions or omissions rather than the intent. The consequences, however, must take into account the interest of the majority or the most influential stakeholders as is the case with Doctor DoRight. References: Lebeer, G. (2002). Ethical Function in Hospital Ethics Committees. New York: IOS Press. Ledlow, G. R. (2011). Leadership for Health Professionals: Theory, Skills, and Applications. New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Morrison, E. E. (2011). Ethics in Health Administration: A Practical Approach for Decision Makers. New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Read More