Please write for initial discussion of 250 words and respond to 2 posts below with 100 words. The following is the initial discussion:
In organizations, we are often challenged to make decisions without having all of the information or understanding all possible impacts of the decisions we make. The nature of an ethical dilemma is based on the fact that there are multiple possible solutions. This activity provides you an opportunity to explore how ethics theories create different ways to approach an ethical dilemma and to help you choose a ‘right' or ‘best' answer.
Consider the following situation: Reflection on our personal experience is often invaluable to the discussion of how ethics theory can change our perspective of a situation. For this activity, consider a time in your professional life when you have struggled with an ethical dilemma.
• Consider your approach to the ethical dilemma.
• Based on your description of your approach, identify which ethics theory best matches your approach.
• Choose another theory that takes a different view and reevaluate the situation applying this theory.
• How does each theory create a different perspective of the situation, and what impact does this have on your decision? Does one theory work better to identify the ‘right' answer?
Post your primary response on the discussion board. Be sure to review your writing for grammar and spelling before posting. Read any postings already provided by your instructor or fellow students. See the SBT Discussion Rubric for how you will be evaluated for this activity. You are also expected to read the responses to your original posts, and if a classmate raises a question or an issue that warrants a response, you are expected to respond.
Your responses to the discussion questions should relate the assigned readings and viewings to the discussion topic and should not consist only of personal opinion. Your opinion is important to the discussion, but it is important that you add connections to the material to support your views. Without a foundation in the literature, your opinion has little professional value. For example, "Based on Trevino and Nelson's stance that cultural relativism creates an environment where unethical behavior is justified through the cultural discourse (year, P#), the discussion should center around......" This type of statement allows you to connect your views to the literature. This is possible even when you are providing personal examples.
Use the subject line as an advanced organizer to allow your classmates and the instructor to have some idea of what your posting is about. For example, a subject line, "response to discussion question," is not appropriate. Your responses to fellow students should contain substance, should be more than just opinion, and must go beyond a simple agreement or disagreement.
1st post is as follows:
I was hired as an on-site service manager and new to everyone, company, customer, and coworkers. We were shaking down the equipment at the customer's site and one of the idler stations had a missing shield/trough to collect excess paste. Now I knew we had forgotten to install it(I was not involved in the build); however the rights and duties perspective(also contractual) would cost my company significant costs to shut down, disassemble, cover lost production, etc. put me in a predicament. From the contract rights perspective they (the customer) had a right to have the machine installed as designed with all pieces as contractually purchased. I took the utilitarian aspect in that fabrication of a replacement piece would allow for the same collection, meets the criteria that the OEM has the right to make changes and as-builts, and build clout in that I admitted to a defect with the customer but took responsibility and authority to make the situation right for proper operation of the equipment once the shield was attached. My project manager and several tech were extremely upset with my blunt honesty; I explained to my boss back home that the move bought us/me (service) points until the open hostility between departments (OEM) erupted in front of the customer's crew.
2nd post is as follows:
My ethical dilemma came recently. Not too long ago I went to the President of the company and asked for several hundred dollars to purchase a new software package. This software upgrade has been a long time in the making and I explained that the software I once used for this purpose was now obsolete and I could no longer get a copy of it from IBM. The boss granted my request and I explained to him that I would install the available 60-day free trial, get it up and working and then at the end of the trial, presuming I found no problems with it, we would purchase it. The plan worked great, I downloaded the new software package, installed it, and configured it to work with our IBM server. Now, this software is a far cry from the old software version and is a prerequisite for moving our development efforts forward with a modern design. The dilemma came while I was downloading some third-party add-ons to the new software when I discovered that this third party was still distributing the older version (it's considered obsolete by most developers) that I am already licensed to use. The dilemma is, do I tell the boss we don't ‘have' to buy the new software, or do I just keep rolling with the package I just spent the better part of a day setting up. I've decided that whichever ethical theory I apply I will likely come up with the same answer, and keep the new software. There are however a couple nuances. If I apply Rights and Duties, I have an obligation to the company to create the best programs in the most efficient and timely fashion, so I can make a strong argument that the new software will allow me to do my best work. With this theory, I would feel compelled to tell my boss right away. The utilitarian theory, on the other hand, might have me argue that the cost of the new software package is only slightly higher than the day's work it would take to uninstall the new version and download, install, and configure the old version. Add to that the argument that the new software will clearly give me an ongoing performance benefit going forward, keeping the new software is clearly the right choice. With this theory, however, I do not feel as compelled to disclose my other discovery.