Ethics 316 Mr. Jeffrey Wisdom Week 5/Ethics Game Dilemmas Frederick R. Paige III
University of Phoenix 2 The ethics game presented in the University of Phoenix library were two scenarios in which business ethics problems were presented and an educated solution was needed with perspective or lenses. In the first scenario, I was presented with a work problem in which one of my employees named Gayle, was feeling sexually harassed by flowers showing up anonymously on her desk. Gayle then sends an email politely requesting a confidential meeting to discuss her feelings in regards to the situation. Other employees in the office have also noticed Bill, a supervisor within another department of the organization, regularly visiting Gayle during the times that the flowers anonymously show up. There are a quite a few issues here that are addressed and need to be answered. How to assure that the company avoids a lawsuit? How to answer Gayles request for confidentiality in our meeting? How to handle Bills harassment of Gayle and how to make sure that an effective harassment program is in place to avoid future incidents? These issues are all key elements in solving this ethical dilemma and must be handled. In this scenario I started with handling the issue of Gayle because that seemed to be the most relevant within the scope of the short term planning need. Gayles request for confidentiality was addressed first because everything else depended on the result I gave her. Avoiding a lawsuit was to generic of a problem to tackle, especially on my own and since I have other leadership and management to handle such a large problem, it was imperative that I handled the smaller issue first. Even though the other issues are important of Bills harassment and an effective harassment program, these could be placed in the middle of the problem-solving situation. By determining the type of problem that I was presented with, enabled me to pick the Rights/Responsibility Lens, which is an ethical action that is doing ones duty and following ethical standards of action. Boylan (2009) states deontology will recommend an action based University of Phoenix 3 upon principle. Principle is justified through an understanding of the structure of action, the nature of reason, and the operation of the will. This is directly related to business ethics because the way this organization has been set up with a structured sexual harassment policy in place that is written down and to be followed by everyone employed, and enforced by management. By taking care of Gayles request for confidentiality ensured that company policy could be followed if there was mention of sexual harassment. The other issues were taken care of in sequential order but still following protocol of the company. Sexual harassment is an issue that goes on in many work environments and companies have set protocols and training in place for employees to help ensure fairness and discrimination of any kind are kept to a minimum. Within the Police Department the same regulations and standards are kept to ensure fairness and equal treatment within the organization. Also, abiding by local, state and federal regulations ensures proper treatment of everyone. Scenario 2 In the second scenario, I was promoted to the position in the company as VP of Operations, and given a scenario in which reports that were filed by a junior researcher were falsified. The company is in the midst of researching and testing a new drug and the researchers that are in charge over that department have given false data. There are both generic and specific problems that exist within this scenario. Whether to tell the junior researcher of my concern. Whether to confront my colleague about the problem with the data in the report? How to ensure the company avoids a lawsuit or how to train my staff to make sure that their reports do not falsify data. Another option is to remain silent about the problem or decide what to do when I believe that a colleague has falsified data in a report. My initial choice was to confront my colleague about the problem with the data in the report hoping to end the problem from the start. University of Phoenix 4 This options does not allow for further follow up of any other problems that could arise. The correct answer would be to establish what to do when you believe that a colleague has falsified data in a report; this option gives you the best array of choices. The relationship lens and the reputation lens are examined and best used in this scenario. Since this scenario involved a friend, it was important to look at the relationship lens especially when it deals with business. Some key theories regarding the relationship lens are justice and communitarian strand of the deontological tradition. The reputation lens is also vital because the company is relying on my report for accuracy, intelligence and truth. In the aspect of not being truthful by filing false reports puts the company at jeopardy from a number of standpoints. Legally the company can be sued and ethically the company has guidelines and standards; which employees must abide. Falsifying reports is a serious matter in not only my organization of the police department but many organizations. Legal and ethical guidelines can be used to terminate employees who falsify reports and are dishonest.
University of Phoenix 5 References Boylan, M. (2009). Basic Ethics (2 nd ed.)