Ethical Dilemma And Analysis In A Workplace: A Case Study

Question 1: Is there an ethical dilemma?

The current scenario that is under study poses some possible ethical dilemmas in regard to the circumstances and the actions that have ensued between Moonlight Inc. and Nirmal. Nirmal is regarded as a very good employee by the company for his abilities to anticipate possible problems before they happen and this has earned him a good reputation both within and outside of the company. He has a special talent for designing artificial intelligence algorithms and also to provide solutions for customer purchasing preferences related problems. He also has a good in depth knowledge of the different issues that Moonlight deals with and the various services offered by his company. He also was developing a program on his own, at his home and on his personal computer, which he believed would be helpful in simulating the analytical skills of the human experts. In order to make his program stand out from the competitors and grab more attention, he also decided to make the software available on cloud computing platform and be available to anyone who needs assistance in any form. The development of his program prompted him to dream about starting his own company and commercialise his product, which would be able to be used by every company irrespective of its sizer or the complexity of the data structures. He put various features in his software, for which he was extremely proud of and believed that he could successfully launch the product in the market.

As he showed the product to Julie, his manager and Head of Data Analytics, she outright rejected the software saying that the software could be highly problematic as it can go rogue and simply make the decisions of its own without human supervision. Nirmal was perplexed at this and simply decided to launch the product on social media platforms and become a consultant under the name Khan Jones and a company Know-IT. He started to work extensively for over the next few weeks when he worked for Moonlight and also consulted companies for solutions to different problems on social media. Julie heard of Khan Jones a few weeks later and upon investing she identified the software and immediately fired Nirmal. Her manager, Harold supported her decision and stood by the arrangements to sack him. However, Harold received an email from the owner of the company, Mary Smithers, telling him that a head-hunter has informed her of Khan Jones and she wants Harold to hire him. This puts Harold in a tricky situation where he has to do critical thinking and take decisions as whether he should stick to the previous decision of firing Nirmal and elaborate on the matter to Mary or does he hire him once more. The email from Mary puts him in a situation where he either has to do as he is told, or stand by and support Julie’s decision.

Here, the main concerns involving ethical issues is the tussle between Julie’s decision to fire Nirmal and Mary’s instruction to hire him back. This situation poses a significant problem for Harold who now has to make a critical decision that would be appeasing everyone’s sentiments, as well as making sure the company is also benefited. Even though the senior authority’s instruction cannot be avoided, making a subordinate feel insulted is also not a desirable option. Hence, the entire ethical situation hinges on the perspectives and priorities set by Harold.

Question 2: Four-step Ethical Analysis and Decision Making Process

1A List of relevant facts

1. Moonlight Inc. is a major software company which provides IT solutions to various big retail companies in Australia.
2. Nirmal is an efficient employee of the company who has a reputation for anticipating problems before they even happen.
3. He also has good knowledge regarding the solutions and services offered by Moonlight.
4. Nirmal developed a program on his own which simulated analytical skills of the humans.
5. He developed the program to make it able to be operating on cloud and also integrated many other features that would make his software better than the ones available in the current market.
6. Nirmal wanted to begin a start-up based on his software and upon completing the software, he offered Moonlight its services at a discount rate, being the first customer.
7. Nirmal’s manager, Julie, rejected the software, identifying it as having potential for becoming rogue and operating without human supervisions.
8. Disappointed, Nirmal began to do consultancy on social websites and launched it there.
9. His company name was Know-IT and he worked under the name Khan Jones.
10. Julie heard of the software on social media and started to investigate the same.
11. She found out the software and immediately recognised it as the one that was previously shown to her by Nirmal.
12. Julie fired Nirmal.
13. He is without a job now, but his software is receiving many enquiries every day.
14. Julie’s manager Harold supports her decision.
15. Harold received and email from Mary Smithers, the owner of the company, asking him to hire of an individual named Khan Jones, of who she has heard of recently.

1B Points among these which raise ethical issues

g: Julie rejected the software without consulting her higher personnel.

h: Nirmal began to do consultancy online on social media without letting the company know, as well as continuing his job at Moonlight.

l: Julie fired Nirmal without holding any meeting with the management.

o: Harold receives and email from Mary Smithers directing him to hire the anonymous software developer Khan Jones.

1C List of stakeholders

Moonlight Inc.

Nirmal, a software engineer at Moonlight Inc.

Julie, Head of Data Analytics

Harold Simpson, Julie’s manager

Mary Smithers, owner of Moonlight.

The most major problem that lies here is the question of whether Harold should just stand by his previous decision and support Julie’s decision to fire Nirmal of does he act as he is told by his superior. Should Nirmal be hired again or should Mary be explained properly about the issues that have taken place without her knowledge. This would also put Julie in a tricky position for not having consulted her higher authorities previously before sacking Nirmal.

Consequentialism

1. If the action in step II is done, that is if Nirmal is hired again, it may be considered that Julie would be harmed. However, there may not be any materialistic harm that may befall her, rather her sentiments and pride may take serious hit.
2. If the action in step II is not done, Moonlight Inc. would be harmed the most for losing a potential asset to the company who was also an employee of the company previously as well. The production and services of the organisation would be hampered. Harold would also be harmed directly, for not following orders from his superior authority.
3. Among the previously mentioned choices, option A would yield least harm, as that would make sure that Nirmal is back on the company and provide his expertise on behalf of Moonlight, establishing its reputation.
4. If the action in step II is done, the most benefit would be reaped by both Moonlight Inc. and Nirmal. The company would benefit from Nirmal’s expertise, as he would benefit with having a job once more. Further benefits would also be enjoyed with the customers of the company who can use Nirmal’s software for their use, according to their needs.
5. If the action in step II is not done, Julie would be benefiting the most as her decision would be rendered as the final one.
6. Among these two alternatives, the most benefit would be gained if the action is done, which means option D should be the choice.

Comments on Consequentialism: In this position, whatever course of action is taken, it would be hurting at least one person involved in the situation. Even Moonlight Inc. will be adversely affected. However, hiring Nirmal back would seem to be the more feasible and rational choice, as this way no monetary harm is going to included. Moonlight would also be benefited. However, Julie’s pride and respect may be damaged in the course. Harold has to do a lot of thinking regarding which aspect to put more priority on.

Rights and duties

1. Moonlight Inc. has the right to know if any of their employees are doing any work in the same field. Julie neglected her duty to inform the authorities on the issues that arose. Nirmal has no right to start the consultancy on social media without any knowledge to the management. Harold also neglected his duties to properly assess and understand the situations before supporting Julie’s decisions.

Comments on rights and duties: Most of the stakeholders involved in the issue neglected their duties and also violated some other person’s rights. These will be assessed against each other to understand the condition properly.

Kant’s Categorical Imperative

1. If action in step II is done, Julie would be treated with disrespect.
2. If the action is not done, Mary Smithers and Nirmal both would be disrespected.
3. Alternative H is more preferable.
4. If the action is done, Nirmal would be treated unlike others.
5. If the action is not done, Julie would be treated unlike others.
6. Alternative K is preferable.
7. If everyone did action in step II, there are benefits.
8. If no one did the action, there are no benefits.
9. Alternative N is preferable to O.

Discussion

From the above summarisations of the events and facts, it is visible that Harold is in the trickiest situation among the other stakeholders and the people involved. Julie fired Nirmal without a second thought as soon as she found out about the fact that he has launched his software online and is doing consultancy on social media. Her manager Harold supported her decision and did not think twice to question her standpoint. Julie’s decision was not conveyed to the senior most management board so they did not know what were the issues that were present or why was Nirmal fired in the first place. The ethical issues that Harold has to face involves either standing by and supporting his subordinate employee or reversing Julie’s initial decision at the direction of Mary Smithers. While Nirmal should not have started the consultancy online while keeping the company in the dark about it, Harold should also have notified his authorities. All the parties involved in the situation have somehow neglected their duties and violated other’s rights. This puts every subsequent actions in a questionable position. Harold now has to either hire an employee who has been fired before as told to do so by Mary and embarrass Julie by reversing her decision; or he has to tell Mary everything about what has happened before and risk himself getting harmed in the process for not letting her know about it before. He has to take a course of action that would maintain a balance in every aspect as well as make sure the owner of the company is contented and the organisation’s services are not hampered.

4A Making a defensible ethical decision

Given the current condition and the parameters to be considered the best option would be for Harold to hire Nirmal again. Since Mary has been informed of Khan Jones, there it is established that Nirmal has the necessary potential to assist in the services provided by Moonlight Inc. and quite possible may be even enhance or improve its qualities as well as expanding the nature of the services offered by the company. On the other hand, Julie is also the Head of the Analytics and she cannot be afforded to be let go by the company either. Hence, retaining Julie and keeping her pleased is also major point of concern for Harold. Since Mary does not know of the things that have happened already, she does not understand the problems that will be arising due to her instructions. Harold still has to come to a decision and the best possible option would be to hire him back while making Julie understand that the instruction of the superior personnel cannot be bypassed or ignored.

4B Steps needed to implement the decision

The best way to implement the decision would be to first elaborate Mary on the events that have already happened. Then she would have a proper idea about how may her instruction cause a problem. However, this knowledge may also prompt her to take adverse steps against Julie for not notifying her before about this. Harold can then proceed to act according to Mary’s instructions and hire Nirmal back once more to Moonlight and agreeing to use his software in the company as well as providing customers services based on Nirmal’s algorithms.

References

Bowie, Norman E. Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Craft, Jana L. “A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 2004–2011.” Journal of Business Ethics 117, no. 2 (2013): 221-259.

Ferrell, Odies C., and John Fraedrich. Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson Education, 2015.

Ferrell, Odies C., and John Fraedrich. Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson Education, 2015.

Ford, Robert C., and Woodrow D. Richardson. “Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature.” In Citation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics, pp. 19-44. Springer Netherlands, 2013.

Kallman, E.A. and Grillo, J.P., Ethical Decision Making and Information Technology, McGraw-Hill, Ch. 3, 1996

Kant, Immanuel. “The Good Will and the Categorical Imperative.” The Ethical Life: Fundamental Readings in Ethics and Moral Problems (2014): 87-99.

Weiss, Joseph W. Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2014.