BSB111 Ethics Case Study: Analyzing Blair's Dilemma at the Casino

This case study analyzes an ethical dilemma faced by Blair, a data analyst at a casino. Blair discovers that his colleague, Sam, has been gambling, violating company policy, after accessing her computer without permission to retrieve missing data. The assignment explores the situation through the lenses of utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and Aristotle's virtue ethics, examining the conflicting moral imperatives and potential courses of action. The student recommends a course of action based on ethical considerations. The case study highlights the complexities of ethical decision-making in a professional environment, considering the implications of violating company regulations and the importance of maintaining ethical conduct. The assignment uses ethical theories to analyze the situation and provide a recommended course of action for Blair.

Running head: ETHICS
Ethics
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ETHICS
Ethical dilemma
Ethical dilemma or paradox refers to decisions making issue involving two different
moral imperative, neither of which strives to resolve the situation as obedience to either
would mean transgressing another (Fisher, 2008). Every ethical dilemma involves two
alternatives; obeying one would result in the avoidance of the other, thereby compromising a
certain ethical principle (Levin, Furlong & O'Neil, 2014).
In the given case, Blair working as a data analyst in a casino logged into his
colleague’s computer system in her absence in order to retrieve certain missing data that he
needed in the professional capacity. Accessing another employee's computer system is
strictly prohibited by every modern company by way of its information technology
regulations stating that data protection and data security is one of the topmost priorities of the
company that is expected from the employees (Levin, Furlong & O'Neil, 2014). In this
regard, Blair would be held guilty of violating the data protection and information technology
regulations as per the company rules.
While retrieving the missing data from Sam’s computer system, Blair found out that
Sam indulged into gambling bets over the last few days with the local sports bookmaker.
Here it is to be noted that the employees of the casino was forbidden from indulging into any
kinds of gambling bets. Even being aware of this restriction, Sam indulged into gambling
bets. In this matter Blair is supposed to report such an incident of the violation of company
rules, however he is unable to do so for he would be questioned regarding the source of his
information. Accessing Sam's computer by Blair in her absence would make Blair guilty of
violation of information technology regulation of the company even though if he provides the
information of Sam’s gambling bets to the company.

2ETHICS
This is the ethical dilemma that Blair is facing at the moment for he can neither report
the fact that Sam has violated company rules by placing bets on gambling nor can he admit
the fact that he accessed Sam’s computer, for it would attract him penalty.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is one of the most the significant moral theories that judge the morality
of an action of an individual, whether right or wrong (Mulgan, 2014). Utilitarianism depends
on the notion that the purpose of morality is how to make the quality of life better by
enhancing the 'greatest happiness of the greater number’ around the world. It strives to
increase the volume of good things like happiness and pleasure in the world thereby
decreasing the volume of bad things like and unhappiness and pain (Mill, 2016). Jeremy
Bentham being one of the most important theorists of utilitarianism makes an impact on
philosophical, social, economic and political policies in the society (Mulgan, 2014).
Therefore applying the theory of utilitarianism in this case, it could be deduced that an
action should be taken which would bring a satisfactory result to the greatest number or
stakeholder in this matter. Blair, Sam and the company are the three stakeholders in this
matter and therefore it should be emphasized on the point that the ultimate decision should
strive to bring happiness or satisfaction to the majority number of stakeholders. Therefore it
could be recommended by following the utilitarian ethics that Blair should keep away from
disclosing the fact that he accessed Sam's computer in her absence for it may get him
expelled from the company. On the other hand, Blair is suggested not to point out Sam’s
unethical conduct of placing a bet over gambling for such information could get her expelled
from the company as well. Therefore it would be wise for her to avoid disclosing, the entire
episode to anyone in order to secure a greater happiness for the greater number of stakeholder
in this matter.

3ETHICS
Kantian ethics
The Kantian ethics emphasize upon the Goodwill of a person and regarded it is an
unconditionally good factor that marks the good nature of a person along with such person's
outlook towards ethics and morality (Baron, 2018). A person who has goodwill shall form his
intentions based on a perspective with moral values. Therefore it is projected that Kantian
ethics directs a person not to pay attention to the consequences of his actions, guided by
goodwill and good intention. This is the exact theory of Immanuel Kant about the
‘unconditional goodness of a goodwill' (O'Neill, 2013).
The Kantian ethics could be applied in the given case scenario that involves an ethical
dilemma of Blair which involves him disclosing the fact that he violated the information
technology regulations of the company by accessing Sam’s computer in her absence along
with finding out from Samsung computer that she was indulging in gambling bets. Applying
the theory of Kantian ethics, it is extremely important for Blair to retain his is unconditional
goodness of goodwill by disclosing the fact to the company that he accessed to Sam's
computer system in her absence. By confessing his guilt, Blair would be free from all kinds
of malice which would otherwise defeat his goodwill. Therefore it is recommended under this
theory that Blair should disclose about his own guilty action of accessing Sam’s computer in
her absence, there by preserving his own goodwill for retaining the unconditional goodness.
Aristotle's virtue ethics
As per Aristotle’s virtue ethics a person having an ideal traits and characteristics is the
virtuous of all. The virtue ethics identifies a virtuous person as someone who shows kindness
in different situations of his life for that is what his character is (Van Hooft, 2014). Such
person is not driven by the madness or competition to gain favours or utility or to simply
perform his is duty. Virtue ethics is often criticized as a self-centered conception, as it does

4ETHICS
not consider the effect of the action of a person. It does not provide guidance pertaining to the
conduct of life, apart from the direction to ‘act as a virtuous person' (Hutchinson, 2015).
Broadly, it focuses on the role of character and virtue in terms of moral philosophy rather
than focusing on performing one’s duty or to bring about good consequences around oneself
(Hutchinson, 2015).
By applying the Aristotle’s virtue ethics in the given case scenario, it is recommended
that Blair may keep both the information about his own violation of the information
technology regulation as well as Sam’s violation of the Company rules to indulge in
gambling, in order to be kind to one another and extend forgiving hands towards his
colleague. By showing kindness and mercy to Sam, Blair would be exhibiting characteristics
of kindness and virtue. As per this theory laid down by Aristotle; Blair would not strive to
guide Sam on the way of righteousness, but only a direction to act as a virtuous person in any
given situation. Therefore it is recommended that Blair could keep the fact about Sam to
himself, thereby preserving is virtue of kindness and save Sam from being expelled from the
company.
Recommended course action
Deviating from the above-mentioned theories, it is recommended that Blair should
communicate about his own guilt of accessing Sam's computer in her absence to the
management. This would help Blair to learn a lesson about maintaining data security and data
protection in his profession, which would take him a long way, without committing any
further unethical errors. In addition, it is also recommended that Blair should disclose about
the unethical approach of Sam to the management, for he indulged in gambling bets even
being aware that the company does not allow its employees to gamble. Disclosure of such
breach of professional duty is vital, for it may amount to certain penalty if the defaulter
admits his own guilt himself before being held liable by the office authority. If the person is

5ETHICS
held guilty for the breach of information technology regulation, it may lead to his
termination. On the other hand, the breach of professional regulation by Sam for placing bets
in gambling even though it is prohibited in her profession, would amount to a serious action
taken by the office authority, which may even lead to her termination.
Conclusion
Therefore, to conclude, it could be held that ethical dilemmas divide the attention of a
person in two variables, taking the person to two different directions. It is evident that it
becomes difficult for the person to choose between the two variables, for both of them are
critical and doubtful. The above discussed case also so give a picture of two variables in one
of which Blair is himself guilty and on the other he found out the guilt of another yet feels
helpless for being unable to report it as it would disclose his own guilt as well. Most often
theory and models lay down by philosophers and social thinkers are used to resolve such
ethical dilemma, however sometimes critical situations are beyond the purview of the age old
theories of the ancient philosophers. In such cases it is the best to follow inner instinct to
achieve the best result.

6ETHICS
References
Baron, M. W. (2018). Kantian ethics almost without apology. Cornell University Press.
Fisher, M. A. (2008). Protecting confidentiality rights: The need for an ethical practice
model. American Psychologist, 63(1), 1.
Hutchinson, D. S. (2015). The virtues of Aristotle. Routledge.
Levin, C. D., Furlong, A., & O'Neil, M. K. (2014). Confidentiality: Ethical perspectives and
clinical dilemmas. Routledge.
Mill, J. S. (2016). Utilitarianism. In Seven masterpieces of philosophy (pp. 337-383).
Routledge.
Mulgan, T. (2014). Understanding utilitarianism. Routledge.
O'Neill, O. (2013). Acting on principle: An essay on Kantian ethics. Cambridge University
Press.
Van Hooft, S. (2014). Understanding virtue ethics. Routledge.