Hiring & Ethics
...ails to consider other alternatives. Would Julie or Mary choose a part time situation? Is there another consultant who would jointly hire either of the individuals? Is Julie bringing sufficient business to create a partnership? If the answer to that is yes, then Mary might work with both of them. Making assumptions without verification can lead to bad choices. Language – The language that was used in communication with Sally, Julie, and Mary can be important to the analysis. Did Sally make a commitment to Julie? Clearly she believes she made a commitment to Mary. So, is Sally in a situation of breaking her commitment no matter what she does? If she seeks to clarify some of her assumptions, she should evaluate her communication. The words she uses and the method of communication can impact her effectiveness. Fallacies – Fallacies can apply to this situation in at least two different ways. The first application is to determine if any of the parties were deceptive. In other words, are facts correct as represented by Mary and Julie? For example, Sally should verify the information provided by both individuals on their employment applications. In this way Sally might uncover additional information which would either verify or disprove her assumptions. Fallacies might also apply to this situation if Sally is using an invalid premise. This could be true if Sally is assuming that she can only hire one of the individuals. If this premise is invalid, her resultant decision could be faulty. Argument – As part of the analysis, Sally could develop an argument for each alternative. Beginning with a premise and ending with a conclusion, this process could help identify the most persuasive argument. She could include the benefits and disadvantages of each alternative. Clearly this would assist in the analysis. As represented in the situation, keeping her word to Mary would maintain Sally’s integrity. However, it results in missed opportunities for her business. If Mary hires Julie, she benefits her business, but costs her integrity. If there is a way to do both, then Sally can benefit all concerned. Logic – This tool is the formal process of reasoning. Sally can validate her assumptions, identify and evaluate her alternatives, and reach a conclusion. It is through her logic that she decides the relevance of the issues and the validity of her reasoning. Problem Solving - The problem solving tool is the actual process of reaching a decision. Sally might choose an informal process or a formal one. If she chooses a formal process, there are a number of decision models available. Philosopher Laura Nash recommends a twelve step process. (cited in Hartman, 2002) Kenneth Blanchard and Norman Vincent Peale suggest asking three questions – Is it legal? Is it balanced? Is it right? (cited in ???this is the same article as our fact scenario) In this paper we will apply the stakeholder theory. (do we need a cite here? It is mentioned in the 1st paragraph) Stakeholder Theory This theory is a decision making model which defines a list of questions. It considers the individuals and groups who have a stake in the results. As a formal process, it seeks to define the implications of a decision before the decision is finalized. In answering the questions, we are assuming that both Mary and Julie are professional employees and that Sally has obtained additional information which has limited her alternatives to the three described in the model. Seek to recognize the moral dimensions. What is the ethical issue? The primary ethical issue is integrity. Sally has given her word to Mary before meeting Julie. Sally believes Julie would be the better hire and bring more money to the business. Who are the interested parties? Who is impacted? What are their relationships? The interested parties are Sally, Julie, Mary, Sally’s business, other employees. Families could be impacted due to economic consequences of the decision. What values are involved? Economic, if Julie would make the business more profitable Integrity, if Julie breaks her commitment to Mary What alternatives do you have in your decision? 1. Hire Mary. 2. Hire Julie, revoke offer to Mary. 3. Explain prior commitment and discuss other alternatives with Julie (partnership or part-time). Weigh the benefits and the burdens of each alternative on each impacted party. Alternative 1 – Hire Mary Sally - Benefits include maintaining personal integrity, contributing to a positive business ethic for the office, and contributing to ethical reputation. Burdens include possible loss of the better employee and loss of additional revenues from Julie’s clients resulting in potentially less income. Mary – Benefits include employment. Burdens include potential employment difficulties if Sally’s regrets impact her relationship with Mary. Julie – Benefits include respect for Sally’s integrity. Burdens include the need to find other employment. Alternative 2 – Hire Julie, Revoke Offer to Mary Sally – Benefits include satisfying her personal preference and potentially increasing her revenue. Burdens include damage to her reputation, potential loss of respect from employees and damage to her self-respect. Mary – Benefits include avoiding employment in a potentially negative environment. Burdens include damage to her self-respect, her respect for Sally, and the need to seek other employment. Julie – Benefits include em...