Case Study Analysis: Ethical Issues and Decision-Making in Business

This assignment presents an analysis of two business ethics case studies and addresses a question related to the APES 110 code of ethics. Part A examines a conflict of interest scenario involving a construction company manager, highlighting ethical issues such as fairness, truthfulness, and justice. The analysis suggests a course of action for the manager. Part B explores a situation where a small business owner seeks help from a government official and faces the ethical dilemma of whether to offer a monetary payment. The analysis considers the principles of respect for the person and beneficence, recommending a course of action. Finally, Question 2 evaluates breaches of the APES 110 code of ethics related to objectivity, professional behavior, and integrity, providing context for each violation.

Part-A
The two key facts of the case are as follow:
 The first fact of the case is that the tender shall be given to the most capable company so
that maximum profits can be riped out.
 The second important key fact in this scenario is the manager. The manager is the CEO
of the construction company and hence has a say in the recommendations.
The ethical issues in the above case are: (Chron 2013):
 Decision-Making Issues: The manager could be biased in selecting his company for the
tender by taking an advantage of his post as a CEO of the company.
 Side Deals: The manager could offer tender to some other company in return of the
commission from that company.
The three ethical principles that are at risk in this situation are as follow:
 Fairness: In this situation fairness of the manager towards other tendering companies are
at risk as he has his own partner company on the tendering list.
 Truthfulness: The truthfulness of the manager is also at risk. He may make
recommendations in favor of the company in which he has a significant share of profits.
 Justice: The ethical principle of justice is also at risk here in this case. As the manager if
recommends his own company then it would be injustice for the other capable companies
that might have done better work in low cost. So another ethical principle is
compromised here (Childress 2005).
(a) Stepping out of decision making would make the manager coward hence the manager
shall not take this decision.
(b) Declaring interest and taking decision would be good for manager as well as company
(c) Not declaring the interest would not be good as recommendations would not be proper in
that case.
In this case manager shall declare the interest and make recommendations for proper
decision making.
Part-B
The three key facts are:
A small business owner is planning to go global for which he is expecting the help of a
government official of that country in which he is intended to set up his further business unit for
business purpose.
 The government official is a key person that can help the business owner in making his
plan successful.

 The government official is expecting a monetary payment in the exchange of his help.
This payment is not clear that if he is asking for a bribe or for official payment.
The one ethical issue in this case is the decision of whether to give the monetary payment to the
government official or not. As he is asking for bribe, which is not a right thing to do.
The two ethical principles in this case are as follows (Severson 2016):
 Respect for the person: In this case the government official is not respecting what the
businessman is intended to do, he is only lending his helping hand in exchange of
monetary payment from the businessman which is wrong.
 Beneficence: Here in this scenario the government official rather than expecting money
should help the businessman in setting up the business and helps him in protecting his
rights but he is only helping him in expectations of getting a monetary compensation in
return.
Two Courses of Action are:
 Make the payment: Making the payment would further increase his demand in future but
on the other hand the monetary payment would be beneficial for me.
 Don’t make the payment: If the payment is not done he wont help me.
So, after going through both the consequences I would want to make him small monetary
payment in return of his favor of helping me.
Question 2:
APES 110 code of ethics for professional accounting (Zsolnai. 2017):
 Objectivity: The fundamental code of ethics has been breached in this situation, as the
BABA ltd is gifting the auditor a set of golf equipments, thinking that it might affects the
auditor’s report.
 Professional Behavior: In this situation the fundamental code of ethic of professional
behavior has been breached, as I helped my friend in getting the loan pass by unfair
means.
 Integrity: Integrity means honesty and truthfulness, the fundamental principle of ethics
as per APES 110 has been breached. As working on local council committee, I am being
dishonest and untruthful as I am favoring my friend’s proposal and ignoring the others.

Bibliography
Childress, J 2005, Belmont Revisited: Ethical Principles for Research with Human Subjects, Springer, New
York.
Chron 2013, viewed 17 Feburary 2011, <http://smallbusiness.chron.com/major-ethical-issues-business-
people-face-20900.html>.
Severson, R 2016, Ethical Principles for the Information Age, Springer, London, viewed 10 june 2016,
<https://www.southuniversity.edu/whoweare/newsroom/blog/ethical-principles-for-business-38725>.
Zsolnai. 2017, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation - A Buddhist Approach, Cengage, London,
viewed 15 july 2017, <https://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/professional-resources/accounting-
professional-and-ethical-standards/apes-110-code-of-ethics-for-professional-accountants>.