- Does he have an ethical dilemma? If yes, what is it?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
Yes, frank has an ethical dilemma. On his recommendation, the company decided to lay- off staff based on performance appraisal made by departmental managers. The rules were that the departmental manager was to collect the score of the employee’s appraisal for the past three years. The condition was that if the employee had been in service for less than three years, or if the score of the individual was identical, then the manager would decide where to rank the person. Frank and the executive committee would choose to draw a line, and those that will be below the line will be laid off. During a review of the evaluations, frank noticed that some people had an N/A score on their evaluation sheet. The dilemma comes in when he requested an explanation as to why their score was invalid. He was told that these employees had worked for the company since its inception and had been given leeway by the CEO on their appraisals. For that reason, the CEO had allowed them to be receiving informal evaluations. Frank then questions the CEO who frankly accepts to evaluating them informally although he felt that it was time that such employees had to retire over their reduced level of output as compared to what they offered in the past. Frank is in a dilemma when his boss tells him that this is a company that cares for its employees. At the same time, the CEO asked him to lay off the three employees since the amount of effort they direct into the organization has reduced as compared to what they used to offer in the past.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..……22. What options are open to him? How would you assess these options using utilitarian and Kantian perspectives?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..………According to a utilitarian perspective, they believe that they should make decisions that bring the utmost happiness. Utilitarians justify the punishment of an innocent party if it necessarily brings out a sufficient effect. The innocent parties, in this case, are the three employees who had received approval by the CEO to be evaluated unofficially. Basing his decision on this perspective, frank has the option of laying off the three employees because they don’t produce enough output to motivate the employees that are working hard. Furthermore this option is justifiable because according to frank’s rules, the laying off of some staff members was solely based on the performance score on the evaluation list in which the three employees had a null score.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..………… The Kantian perspective sets an insight into the intentions of the particular action. Kantianism propagates for the idea that human life is essential because it is the bearer of rational being. Unlike the utilitarian perspective, the ideology of Kantianism believes that humans should not be used purposely for the happiness of others. Therefore, according to this perspective, frank has the option of choosing not to lay- off the three employees because they might have been caught in the middle of two conflicting rules caused by their superiors. In this context, the conflict of the superiors is between the CEO’s ease of letting them evaluate them informally, and Frank’s new requirement for all employees is that they provide their evaluation score.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
- How should Frank proceed (what should he do)? Justify your answer.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………, I think the best option for frank to take is to apply the Kantian perspective in his decision and keep the three employees. Even if he is faced with a severe dilemma of laying off the employees and saving more jobs for the younger people. The reason why this option is better is that we are not sure whether the employees will file a lawsuit against the company or not. The chances of filling a lawsuit are higher because they were not informed before they lay off. Additionally, the company’s policy, as stated by the CEO, is to care for its employees, and to lay off the three employees pettily would be a dishonor to that policy. According to his rules over the laying off of the employees, his lay-off algorithm only requires people with the least evaluation score and not those with a void or blank score.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
PART 2. ESSAY QUESTIONS (Please answer ONLY TWO questions out of the following four essay questions).
Question 1) Identify the reasons why an organization would be interested in being ethical and classify those reasons in terms of whether they represent moral motivation or economic motivation.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
An organization ought to have an ethical behavior so that it can be relevant in the competitive world. The ethics of an organization are not primarily dependent on the procedures and policies but rather through the actions of the management. Some of the reasons why many organizations have chosen to be ethical include;
- To safeguard the interest of the surrounding community to win the public trust. In this context, the organization is economically motivated because the community sees them as more ethical, therefore laying their faith in engaging in business with them. The real reason why the organization is being ethical is that they want to attract many people who will subsequently lead to increased profits.
- To satisfy the stakeholder expectations. This is economically motivated. Stakeholders are often related to profits.
- To keep the societal commitment of engaging in ethical business. This is morally motivated because its main objective is to adhere to societal and environmental expectations.
- To safeguard the organizational interest. This is economically motivated because most of the corporate interests are economically-driven.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
Question 4) What conditions would have to be present for you to blow the whistle about unethical conduct you observed at work? How would you go about it?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………Raising the alarm at work about individual malpractice that you observed is a difficult task to do usually because people don’t want to be referred to as a snitch. Other factors, according to research, reveal most people that blew a whistle were either dismissed, victimized, or the employer denied the likeliness of a problem. The study also finds out that the management solved very few cases. The law protects the whistleblowers even if they often face these kinds of discrimination. However, some of the conditions that a person has to consider before blowing a whistle are that they should have a valid case, identifying the proper channel for making a report, have credible evidence to back your claim and to consider the moral and financial implications. Having a valid case includes criminal, health, and safety breaches or cover-ups, and the law shall protect you if your concerns involve all of the latter. The proper channel of making reports is usually found in the company’s handbook. Evidence is usually required to make accusations valid, and therefore before you make any reports, you must have concrete proof. Considerations of the moral and financial impact are usually considered during the issuance of rewards to encourage them. However, in most countries, the moral imperative is traditionally considered more important than the financial obligation.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………