Ethics & Libor
Marcella’s case
Here the issue is Marcella has been asked by the manager, who is in charge of the contract, to provide a convenience as claiming his tour expense in the projects’ expenses. It is actually a position-related consumption, by abusing his power on the project, he tends to approve the Marcella’s invoice and misappropriate public funds for private consumption. The role Marcella plays here is to do a favor, pay the manager’s tour fee first and claim it into her contract reward. There is no loss occurs for Marcella if she promises, and even the relationship with the manager will become better that definitely facilitates her work in the future. Nonetheless, she can be accused as an accomplice of the manager’s malfeasance. Also concerns arise for the authenticity of the manager’s incentive on the tour. If it is not really aim at understanding Hoople, the behavior conflicts the project and the aid bank’s interests, which could be against law. The main involvers in the circumstance are Marcella, manager, bank, citizens and Hoople, local officials and UK i.e. the business reputation. By identifying all possible dimensions of actions, Marcella can only take accept or reject.
We will implement Marcella on ethical decision making through ethics screening, which depicts three perspectives to determine the moral level: Principles, Conventional and Ethical Tests approaches. The essay will mainly employ perspective principle, the analysis as shown below:
Ethical Principles If accept
Rights • Manager: right of administration (no change)
• Bank: right of funding (no change) right to know (negative)
• Hoople: right to receive payment (no change)
• Citizens: beneficial right
Here the issue is Marcella has been asked by the manager, who is in charge of the contract, to provide a convenience as claiming his tour expense in the projects’ expenses. It is actually a position-related consumption, by abusing his power on the project, he tends to approve the Marcella’s invoice and misappropriate public funds for private consumption. The role Marcella plays here is to do a favor, pay the manager’s tour fee first and claim it into her contract reward. There is no loss occurs for Marcella if she promises, and even the relationship with the manager will become better that definitely facilitates her work in the future. Nonetheless, she can be accused as an accomplice of the manager’s malfeasance. Also concerns arise for the authenticity of the manager’s incentive on the tour. If it is not really aim at understanding Hoople, the behavior conflicts the project and the aid bank’s interests, which could be against law. The main involvers in the circumstance are Marcella, manager, bank, citizens and Hoople, local officials and UK i.e. the business reputation. By identifying all possible dimensions of actions, Marcella can only take accept or reject.
We will implement Marcella on ethical decision making through ethics screening, which depicts three perspectives to determine the moral level: Principles, Conventional and Ethical Tests approaches. The essay will mainly employ perspective principle, the analysis as shown below:
Ethical Principles If accept
Rights • Manager: right of administration (no change)
• Bank: right of funding (no change) right to know (negative)
• Hoople: right to receive payment (no change)
• Citizens: beneficial right