Case Study: Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

Oct 28, 2018 | 0 comments

Oct 28, 2018 | Miscellaneous | 0 comments


In the corporate world today, moral intelligence is one of the most significant elements of leadership that are required especially when resolving ethical dilemmas in an organization or a company (Peck 97). Nonetheless, particular instances often reward bad behavior abnormally but this happens only as a short-term occurrence. Evidence determinately suggests that good actions or manners tend to pay off in the end. In a natural incidence, ethical dilemmas engage divergence or differences between deeply held various beliefs and that makes them tough. Considering the case study involving Microtech Inc, it is conclusively tricky and complicated to a make decision between leaving the company stock to sink or sealing a dishonest and crooked deal involving the Fortune 500 that will save and exceed the firm’s projected sales (Peck 99).

Part A:

Being the sales representative of Microtech Company, pressures resulting from side deals would considerably affect my decision-making process (Peck 88). Being an employee with a contract, I am required to work solely for the interest of the firm and to use my talents to increase the sales in agreement with the company’s vision and strategy. However, considering that the business is facing serious challenges on the sales and the stock price is falling downwards, it would be difficult to anticipate the ethical issues that would affect the company in case I decide to complete the lucrative deal offered by Fortune 500. As well, it would be hard to envisage or visualize the negative impacts that the agreement would impose on the latter company taking into account that the stock of computers in my store does not meet the needs of the proposed deal. Diverting attention to making a huge commission and sealing a tentative and dishonored deal that would dare negative consequences in the long term mean I would be in contravention of both my ethical and contractual duties.

As a leader in the sales department, it is my responsibility or duty to implement the greatest care about decisions that affect the firm’s overall sales. The dilemma that faces me in this episode involves an extensive investigation of the matter that influences the interest of the company; therefore, failing to investigate would be taken as gross carelessness and negligence sustaining a violation of my legal and ethical duty of care.

Accepting the side deal as a way of rescuing the company’s sales would be a unique moral challenge (Peck 87). The attraction towards the offer contained in Fortune 500 deal would be tempting to accept the agreement because that would ultimately boost the sales significantly within a short time and would earn me a high commission as the sales representative. The deal would influence my honorable profession toward accepting the offer since the positive implications would outweigh the adverse effects.

Again, pressures resulting from gross negligence would delay the process of taking the deal since my instinct, as a leader would keep on questioning whether the slackness and gross carelessness are in line with a leader’s ethical duties (Peck 101). Consequently, the end of the negligence would mean the acceptance of the deal even if the conduct or action in question is unacceptable by the management of the computer company.

In addressing the pressures, it would be imperative that I know my values as a leader about which the society or business ethics agrees. For instance, in trying to honor or value honesty, I would rather intend to apply the values than changing them. As a way of approaching the dilemma, it would be significant that I create a list of my core values, which would in the end, serve not only my interest but also the interest all other parties involved in my sales deals including the computer company.

Various questions would emerge about the final consequences of accepting the worthwhile and profitable deal offered by the Fortune 500 Company. One of such questions would be how the acceptance of the agreement would affect my profession as a salesperson suppose the outcome influences the plans and strategies of Fortune 500 negatively. More questions as well come into view about the short-term and the long-term impacts of the transaction.

Beyond a shadow of the doubt, closing the deal would amount to quitting my job as prior planned and venturing into another business; this is because the choice would finally haunt my responsibility as a sales person in any case I decided to stay in the firm. The participants who would be affected mostly by the deal include the Fortune 500 Company and I. The reason is that ultimately I would be compelled to leave or resign in the short-term following my decision and the anticipated results. Besides, the company would be troubled in the long-term, as the remaining 2000-computer supply would fail to reach them in time hence lead to the incurrence of high costs.

In trying to justify my ultimate decision, the consequential theories would be useful in judging the outcomes (Peck 102). Because my action of accepting the deal would have much more positives than negatives, it means then that the behavior would be morally right. One of such theory is the egoism, which emphasizes on the promotion of the long-run interest. The theory would be critical since it is useful in the decision-making and it is flexible as well. Additionally, because the act would produce a greater ratio of good than evil for all parties involved, it would be arguably reasonable to justify the decision using the utilitarianism theory that is flexible and recognizes interests of all sides participating in the deal. Conversely, the theory of utilitarianism would be significant in resolving conflicts of interests (Peck 105).

Part B:

Leaving in nine months would not affect my process of decision-making taking into account that the decision is not influenced by the anticipated departure, but by the weighty positive effects in comparison to the probable negative influences. Considering the theory of utilitarianism (Peck 109), the verdict made would produce a greater ratio of good compared to bad for both companies. To handle the situation resulting from the pressures, I would prepare a pact with the Fortune 500 Company specifying all the details of the agreement including the components of the technical support. Proper documentation, illustrating that the company will not be responsible for any delay in delivery would help solve the conflict between the two companies.

It would be unethical for the fortune 500 to know that refurbished computers form part of the deal. As well, it would be unprincipled to reason that because my company provides technical support, and then it should supply refurbished computers. In any case, that reasoning would be legal if only the company in question had requested for repaired machines or did not specify at all the kind of computers they wanted, whether brand new or new renovated. Conversely, buying the 2000 computers from Bleevit would magnify the problem of my company since the budget for the technical support would shoot up in the long term due to the purchase of the easily crashed second-hand machines. Additionally, the deal would cause more problems to Fortune 500 because of the anticipated damages acquired from the renovated computers and the probable loss of information and data stored on the computers.

In considering whether to buy the 2000 machines from Bleevit, the question that would arise is what wrongs the deal would amount to in the end. Another disturbing question would be the consequences of the outcome in conflict with justice. As a way of avoiding disagreement due to delay in supply, I would accept the transaction with Bleevit as that would be the easiest way to unstuck my company from the sales misfortunes and its end outcome would recognize interests of all including Fortune 500.

The theory of utilitarianism in the consequential theories justifies my action again based on the principle that its usefulness in decision-making is flexible, and it is tremendous in resolving the conflict of interest. The Multiple Rule (Prima Facie duties) in the non-consequential theory would as well explain my choice since the decision is based on my obligation to fulfill duties as outlined in the companies work guidelines.

Part C:

The ethical dilemmas arising from this situation include the criteria for decision-making and the modification of the deal to fit commerce. Since the proposal involves two brothers with an intention of drawing large profits from a shady deal, it would be ethically difficult to arrive at the formulation of the corporation since that would affect my reputation as an investment and wealth management advisor. Choosing between accepting and repelling the sweet deal would amount to an ethical dilemma (Peck 111). Besides, the fact that the international trading laws differ with countries affect the ethics of this situation because the decision of accepting the deal would mean breaching the policies and regulations of my country as a way of fulfilling individual selfish interest. As well, it would be equivalent to taking advantage of powers given to make corrupt deals for self-gain.

As a method of achieving or accomplishing the desired outcome for the proposed deal, it would be significant to consider the international laws and arrive at the one that would not cause ethical divergence, conflicts in case Steve, and I decided to formulate the corporation. For this circumstance, adopting the Kuwaiti culture and regulation, which allows for freedom in all business transactions including processes of establishing firms, would provide a favorable business environment for the deal to sell through. To have the desired outcomes, and as well consider the interests of all companies involved, accepting, or agreeing to the Kuwaiti ethics as an international base for the deal would be significant (Peck 97).

The actions could apply legally overseas if at all the laws and culture of the international country supported the transaction. As well, the provisions of the law in my country would render the Steve’s proposal unethical considering the impacts that the actions would result to in the end. In an ideal business environment, laws at all times support moral and ethical behaviors. Again, to proceed in this situation, it is important to analyze both the international and the local business culture and laws before proceeding to this judgment.

As a leader with a great reputation, I am in a great ethical dilemma since my value of honesty and my belief that I should not at any time hurt somebody’s feelings or emotions are in conflict with the outcome of avoiding the deal. The CFA code of ethics requires that top leaders or managers must make a substantial and important culture of ethics at their firms, which must sieve through their whole company, and not just amongst CFA candidates or CFA charter holders. Concerning this code of ethics, it would be a difficult decision to make choosing between accepting Steve’s lucrative proposal and repelling the offer (Peck 108).

Work Cited

Peck, Sarah W. Investment Ethics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Print.