Case Study: Sandwich Blitz

Running head: Ethics

Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility
Jasmine A. Mills
MT140: Introduction to Management
Gillian Martin

Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility Sandwich Blitz, Inc. top level managers Dalman and Lea have found themselves in an ethical dilemma with a government inspector about the distance between the dumpsters and their back door. Due to the new local health codes and laws having been issues requiring trash dumpsters to be a minimum distance of 30 feet from the rear entrance of the building, and new land-use laws requiring that all out buildings be at least 6 feet from the property lines. The enclosure that houses the trash dumpster is 5 feet from the property line, which is in violation of those
laws. The government inspector has told the unit manager that he would be willing to approve this if Sandwich Blitz provides the food for his department’s holiday party. The following describes sandwich Blitz, Inc.’s ethical and corporate social responsibility to maintain their integrity as a company and do what is right regardless of any inconveniences or expenses it could potentially cause.
Integrity
According to the eight steps to integrity Sandwich Blitz, Inc., “With the awareness of what’s right cimes the abligation of right action.” (Sherman, 2003 (28)).
It is importan that Sandwich Blitz, Inc. top lecel management Delman and Lea continue to maintain ther integrity regardless of the face that the inspector is willing to overlook the violation to benefit his deoartment. The organazation must take resposnability (Sherman, 2003 (28)). By taking respnsibility it is up to Balman and Lei to recognizethat they are in violation of the new laws and change it to make sure that their locations are in legal
compliance.
A solution There is a simple solution that could be to remove the housing that encloses the dumpsters being currently used by Sandwich Blitz, Inc. that would free up the extra space from the property line needed to allow the company to meet the criteria for the new laws that they have found themselves to be in violation of.
Solution two There are also 2 yard dumpsters that are smaller commercial dumpsters commonly used by small businesses. If Sandwich Blitz, Inc. is using a larger dumpster then purchasing or trading out the size of the large dumpster for the smaller dumpster would increase the usable space. It may even prove to lessen the cost of waste management for the company to do this.
The option Whichever option Dalman and Lei decide to go with, it must be one that is lawful as well as one where the company maintains its integrity.
The whole idea of Sandwich Blitz, Inc. was initially to provide a healthier alternative to the services available when Dalman returned overseas. It would cast a definite negative light on the organization for them to be found in violation of health codes and laws. It is imperative for Sandwich Blitz, Inc. top level manager to maintain an integrity-based and ethical company while respecting others in order to instill and invoke in their employees and customers a personal responsibility for integrity and ethical behavior. To adhere to the unlawful antics proposed by the inspector would compromise the integrity and reputation of the company as a whole. It is in the best interest of the company for Dalman and Lei to define the rules and values. As Sherman’s 8 steps toward integrity states that, “Explicit agreement about these basics enables groups of people, from couples to business organizations to nations, to benefit from the integrity of members. Absent consensus, personal integrity can lead dissenting individuals to subvert the group. Among people sharing the intentions, by contrast, disagreements can help refine and improve ideas for the benefit of all.” (Sherman, 2003
(28))
Conclusion
In concluston, overall Dalman and Lei have need to check there refection in the mirror and ask “ Is this who I am?” (Sherman, 2003 (28)). It has not been a regular practice for Sandwich Blitz, Inc. to operate on the what that is not necomign to the organization in the past, and therefore weighing the risks of making a dicison to do something that goes against all that they would want the company to represent and that they themselves stand for would be a bad strategic move on their part. It is always better to do what they say they will do, and continue to use integrity and ethical responsibilities in conducting their business whether written by law or not. That way they are showing there employees this is what we also want form you.

References

Sherman, S. (2003 (28)). Rethinking Integrity. Leader to Leader, 39-45.
Snell, S. A., & Bateman, T. S. (2013). Management. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.