Ethics Case
Elizabeth Barrett
September 15, 2012
MNGT 3100 - Dr. Johnson
Ethics Case
“A Good Team Player”
1) Describe the Situation Steven, a staff accountant in the accounts payable section, is confident that he knows the “ins” and “outs” of the bureaucratic organization he works in. Kristin, a no non-sense type of manager, has just been promoted the new manager of the accounts payable section. Steven believes people seem to gain promotions and have the opportunity to work overtime based on who likes them rather than the quality of their work. As a result, Steven who is dissatisfied suggests to Kristin that things would be better if the “favoritism” could be stopped. Kristin uses the power of her new position to get Steven to give her the names of the bad team players or else she will start to think he is part of the problem. Steven, stunned, cannot think of a way to respond.
2) Identify the possible courses of action. There are three possible courses of action that I can take away from this situation. One situation involves Steven and the company, and one that involves Steven only. 1. The first would be for Steven to respond to Kristin’s demands and give her the names of the bad team players. By doing this, it would benefit himself in the long run and will allow the company to better their work force. 2. The second would be for Steven to refuse to go along with either of Kristin’s demands. Although this would not be beneficial for him and could hurt the company in the long run, it will protect the other employees and their rights. 3. Steven could request time to consider his options. By doing this he can maybe find a logical explanation that will allow the firm to better themselves without any problems.
3) What are the ethical impacts of each alternative at different levels of analysis (macro, firm or company, and individual levels)? In the first option, Steven responding to Kristin’s demands would be beneficial on a macro level because if all
September 15, 2012
MNGT 3100 - Dr. Johnson
Ethics Case
“A Good Team Player”
1) Describe the Situation Steven, a staff accountant in the accounts payable section, is confident that he knows the “ins” and “outs” of the bureaucratic organization he works in. Kristin, a no non-sense type of manager, has just been promoted the new manager of the accounts payable section. Steven believes people seem to gain promotions and have the opportunity to work overtime based on who likes them rather than the quality of their work. As a result, Steven who is dissatisfied suggests to Kristin that things would be better if the “favoritism” could be stopped. Kristin uses the power of her new position to get Steven to give her the names of the bad team players or else she will start to think he is part of the problem. Steven, stunned, cannot think of a way to respond.
2) Identify the possible courses of action. There are three possible courses of action that I can take away from this situation. One situation involves Steven and the company, and one that involves Steven only. 1. The first would be for Steven to respond to Kristin’s demands and give her the names of the bad team players. By doing this, it would benefit himself in the long run and will allow the company to better their work force. 2. The second would be for Steven to refuse to go along with either of Kristin’s demands. Although this would not be beneficial for him and could hurt the company in the long run, it will protect the other employees and their rights. 3. Steven could request time to consider his options. By doing this he can maybe find a logical explanation that will allow the firm to better themselves without any problems.
3) What are the ethical impacts of each alternative at different levels of analysis (macro, firm or company, and individual levels)? In the first option, Steven responding to Kristin’s demands would be beneficial on a macro level because if all