Professional Environment Ethical Business Dilemma

Question: Discuss about the Professional Environment for Ethical Business Dilemma. Answer: 1: An ethical dilemma is quite common in a workplace. In case of ethical dilemma, an employee or an employer encounters a very complex and confusing situation, whereby it becomes challenging for the worker to take a firm decision, as the choice of one decision leads to the transgression of the other (Natale and Doran 2012). In the present case study, it has been observed that Alice, an employee of the organization named ACE, has utilized her professional skills and expertise for the purpose of creating and inventing her own security system, that owing to its unique, innovative and highly advanced qualities was capable of offering better protection to any kind of threat to the Information and Technology system of an organization. However, when Alice introduced the program to the manager of ACE, Ted, Ted absolutely refused to use it, owing to the absence of sufficient confidence in the capabilities of Alice. However, when Alices program was rejected by her own organization, she started continuing with her job, while at the same time focusing sufficient time, on the development of her program as well, and soon produced the same I the market under the pseudo name of Locksmith. . However, as and when the program became popular among the masses, and Ted discovered that Locksmith was none else but Alice herself, he immediately terminated her (Weiss 2014). Now, Teds manager Sheila Silk who was supposed to re-examine and review the whole thing, before terminating the service of an employee, relied blindly on the decision of Ted, and worked solely based on her prejudiced opinion towards Alice. The problem emerged when Busta, the owner of ACE, came to know about Locksmith, and asked Sheila to hire her, who was very well-aware about the actual identity of Locksmith. Here, the ethical dilemma emerges in the mind of Sheila silk, as to what she is supposed to do, as she is left with two conditions: Sheila will not hire back Alice. Sheila should hire Alice, as she has the necessary professional expertise required to take the organization a few steps ahead in a highly competitive market. It can be understood from the case study, that Alice was being terminated from her job without any justified grounds. Alice did not indulge in any kind of illegal activity, as she did not violate any privacy law of the business organization. A programmer can be sued and her service can be terminated, if he fails to follow the ethical guidelines such as giving proper credit for intellectual property, or honoring the confidentiality of his work or projects (Daft and Marcic 2016). In case of Alice, she has violated none of the ethical guidelines, and yet her service was being terminated on ground of the fact that she has hidden her identity, and has produced products in the market, instead of devoting her service solely to the development of the organization she has been working in, for the last 5 years. Alice has not behaved unprofessionally, and she has merely used her own professional skills, a part of which she has acquired from the training programs at ACE, to create her own progra m. Sheila, the senior manager of the organization must have reviewed and re-assessed the whole situation, to find out if it was an example of wrongful termination (Kruppe et al. 2016). It is noteworthy here that Sheila worked out of her biased opinion towards Alice, and it is evident that she has not gone through the positive performance reviews of Alice. Now, although she has been asked by the owner to hire Locksmith, she knowing the real identity, is unable to decide if she should hire back Alice, as it would also interrogate her and the managements decision in terminating the service of a highly skillful employee. It should be noted that each organization has a set of rules pertaining to the employment practices, and hence neglecting any of these rules, can lead to the accusation of breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing (Deaking and Morris 2012). The ground of termination of the service of Alice, is unjust and more importantly Sheilas decision to support and give consent to the decision of Ted, is in itself so wrong and devious that it can bring legal charges against her. Even if an employee is terminated due to the negligence of duty, she is supposed to be given a warning, something which was also denied to Alice. Now that Alice has proved her expertise and skills in the market, Sheila is confronting an ethical dilemma, regarding the fact whether she should hire the employee fired on unjust ground by the organization, or should the organization lose the working skills of a highly resourceful expert (Walsh 2015). 2: Four Step Ethical Analysis and Decision Making Process: Situation: Relevant Facts: In the present case study, it has been observed that Alice, the programmer working at ACE, develops her own program that owing to the unique and highly innovative features becomes an immediate success once it is launched in the market. However, as she has already approached her manager, who rejected the possibility of the sale of the program at a discounted or even free cost, the manager Ted on discovering the fact that Alice is using a pseudo name for continuing her business in the market, terminates her from her job. Ethical Issues: The main ethical issue that has emerged out of the situation is that Alices service was being terminated without any practical or justified ground. It is to be noted here that the case study suggests that she is an efficient worker of the organization, who has gained sufficient skill and knowledge about her work, by participating in a variety of trainings. Although she has initiated her private business, she cannot be accused of having neglected her official duty for the purpose of self-advancement (Bagenstos 2013). The case study clearly states that she worked in her own time, that did not intervene with the official work. The potential harm caused as a result of this ethical issue, is that an employee was being terminated without any justified ground. This resulted in the loss of Alices job that would not only affect her financial stability and dignity, but might also affect her family who might be dependent on her income. The next ethical issue that arose here is that Sheila, the senior manager must have cross checked and verified the entire situation, before terminating the service of an employee, and yet her decision was absolutely governed by her prejudiced opinion about Alice (Mamorsky 2015). The harm caused as a result of this ethical issue, is that that the organization lost the skill and expertise of a highly efficient and talented employee. Alice herself had also made an ethically wrong decision, when she chose to hide her real identity, and employ the pseudo name Locksmith, for conducting private business. Non-disclosure of private information is an ethical issue, and affects the reputation of the organization, in case the employee is engaged in an immoral act. This ethical issue might not affect the organization as a whole. However, if as an employee Locksmiths real identity would have been disclosed later, not only Alice would have been penalized, but the reputation of ACE might also get tarnished as well. Stakeholders Involved: Employee (Alice) Manager 1 (Ted) Manager 2 (Sheila) Shareholders (Jennings 2012). Government Step 2: Isolate the Major Ethical Dilemma: The major ethical dilemma that arises here is that whether Alice should be called back to work, or the organization should respect the decision taken by the manager of the organization, Ted. In case Alice is being called back to work she may sue the manager, Ted for having terminated her service without any valid or just grounds. Besides, her disclosure of unfair treatment to the other employees may create a negative impression in the minds of the employees, regarding the senior management system. Alice could also try to seek vengeance for the unlawful action taken against her, and may potentially harm the resources of ACE. However, if Alice s not being called back, the organization may lose efficient expertise of Alice, and may consequently be outrivaled by other organizations. In both the cases, the organization will be harmed; however, not hiring Alice would cause lesser harm to the organization. In case Alice is again hired, Alice will benefit, given the greater amount of financi al compensation, and incentive she can gain, while in case Alice is not being re-appointed, other rival organizations may benefit. However, choosing the second alternative that is not hiring Alice will be the most beneficial alternative (Shapiro and Stefkovich 2016). Step 3: Consequentialism: If Alice is being called back to work, then the reputation of the organization might get harmed. Since, Alice was being fired by the management authority of ACE, she might seek vengeance by harming the organization and its brand reputation, after re-joining the organization. If Alice is not being called back to work at ACE, then the organization might be harmed to a considerable extent. This is because, Alice has proved her skill, expertise and efficiency in program development, and in case she is employed by a rival organization, that organization will have a competitive advantage over ACE. Not hiring Alice back, is the alterative that will cause the least harm to the organization. If Alice is being hired back, Alice will be benefitted, though it should be remembered that she has already benefitted as the product introduced by her was an immediate success in the market, and as such she would gain enough recognition, to be able to earn sufficient amount of money. Hence, the organization would be benefitted by hiring a resourceful employee like Alice. If Alice is not being called back, the organization might be benefitted, as there would be less threat to the security system of the organization. Not hiring Alice will always result in maximum benefit, as though the organization might not be benefitted by the appointment of a talented employee, it would not have to suffer from a possible threat coming from an ex-employee. Consequentialism Comments: Not hiring Alice back, is the alterative that will cause the least harm to the organization. In case Alice is not being hired, another organization may temporarily gain a competitive advantage over ACE, and yet it should be noted that ACE can still use the product produced by Alice, and utilize the same for the organizations benefit. However, if Alice is hired back, she will gain sufficient knowledge about the security system of the organization, and may exploit the same for harming the information security system of the organization. In case Alice is not being hired, the organization will be benefitting the most under the given situation. This is because although the organization may not lose a potential and highly resourceful employee like Alice, they would at least not have to suffer from the fear of information hacking, and information theft, because of the presence of an agitated ex-employee. Rights and Duties: The rights and the duties violated here are as follows: The firing of Alice was illegal and as such the basic employment right was violated here, which clearly states that if an employee would be terminated, he/she should be terminated on properly justified grounds. Further, it is the duty of the employer to cite sufficient cause, as well as to provide a warrant before terminating the service of a employee. Again, the basic duty was also being violated when Sheila refused to review ad re-examine the whole situation, before providing consent to Teds decision of terminating the service of an employee, Alice. Another breach of duty, no less than an offence, was being conducted when Alice used a fake identity, for selling her program in private, while working as a program developer at ACE. Rights and Duties Comments: It can be seen from the above discussion that not only the management authority had violated the basic laws about fundamental rights and duties of the nation, but as a employee Alice can also be accused of identity theft. Kants Categorical Imperative: If Alice is being hired back, Ted as a manager as well as Sheila as a senior manager would be disrespected. If Alice is not being hired back, not only Alice would be disrespected, but the owner Busta Bigwig would also be disrespected. The alternative of not hiring back Alice is preferable. If Alice would be called back, then Ted ad Sheila would be treated unlike others. If Alice is not being called back, Busta will be treated unlike others. The alternative of not hiring back Alice is preferable. If Alice is being hired back, the organization might benefit from her professional expertise. If nobody agrees with the decision of hiring back, the benefit would be the company would be able to save itself from the fear of information theft. The alternative of not hiring back Alice would be the most preferable. Discussion: It has been understood that although Alice has perpetrated an action, that cannot be regarded as absolutely ethical, when she chose to conduct private business, without disclosing her identity to her own organization, or to the world, she did not deserve termination of her service. It should be remembered that if Alice chooses, she can sue the managers, Ted and Sheila, for having terminated her without any warning, and more importantly without a systematic approach to the situation as her performance history was neither reviewed nor was considered in the process (Oliver 2014). Decision: Finally, it can be concluded that the organization, as for now, should not hire Alice back, as her unfair treatment and poor experience in the organization may tempt her to cause serious harm to the information security system of the organization. It is advisable here that the organization creates a set of stringent ethical guidelines that must be followed by the employees as well as the managers, while appointing or terminating an employee. The management authority of ACE may also consider writing an apology letter to Alice, apologizing for the treatment meted out to her, while congratulating her on her success at the same time. Reference List: Bagenstos, S.R., 2013. Employment Law and Social Equality.Mich. L. Rev.,112, p.225. Daft, R. and Marcic, D., 2016.Understanding management. Nelson Education. Deakin, S.F. and Morris, G.S., 2012.Labour law. Hart publishing. Frericks, P., Jensen, P.H. and Pfau-Effinger, B., 2014. Social rights and employment rights related to family care: Family care regimes in Europe.Journal of aging studies,29, pp.66-77. Jennings, M.M., 2014.Business: Its legal, ethical, and global environment. Nelson Education. Kruppe, T., Rogowski, R. and Schmann, K., 2013.Labour market efficiency in the European Union: Employment protection and fixed term contracts. Routledge. Mamorsky, J.D., 2015.Employee Benefits Law: ERISA and Beyond. Law Journal Press. Natale, S.M. and Doran, C., 2012. Marketization of education: An ethical dilemma.Journal of business ethics,105(2), pp.187-196. Oliver, L., 2014. Linda Dickens (ed.), Making Employment Rights Effective: Issues of Enforcement and Compliance.Work, Employment Society,28(1), pp.139-141. Shapiro, J.P. and Stefkovich, J.A., 2016.Ethical leadership and decision making in education: Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas. Routledge. Walsh, D.J., 2015.Employment law for human resource practice. Nelson Education. Weiss, J.W., 2014.Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.