Business Ethics: Analysis of Case Studies and Proposed Solutions

This assignment presents a detailed analysis of three business ethics case studies. The first case examines a quality assurance engineer's dilemma regarding product shipment with potential data loss, exploring ethical issues, stakeholders, and alternative solutions based on utilitarianism, rights and duties, and justice and fairness. The second case focuses on an electrical engineer witnessing favoritism in a company, analyzing the ethical implications and potential actions, again using ethical theories to guide the decision-making process. The final case delves into a scenario of sexual harassment, discussing the ethical issues, stakeholder considerations, and alternative courses of action, also applying ethical frameworks to determine the best approach. Each case study includes the identification of relevant facts, ethical issues, stakeholders, possible alternatives, ethical evaluations of alternatives, and the practical constraints involved, culminating in recommendations for action.

Running Head: BUSINESS ETHICS
BUSINESS ETHICS
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note

1
BUSINESS ETHICS
Case 1
What Are the Relevant Facts?
The facts that have been identified in the given scenario are:
 Rachel is the quality assurance engineer at a large electronics company
 There is a contract between the company Rachael works for and another software
company, which makes, chips that are installed into the servers made by the company
Rachael works for.
 Rachael has a limited timeframe for conducting the tests due to the business model of the
product which requires new generation servers every six months
 Due to shortage of time the Quality Assurance team cannot perform all kinds of tests.
 Rachael cannot ship any product in which the server can malfunction
 Rachael however ships products even if there is a high chance of data loss of the clents
What Are the Ethical Issues?
 The relevant ethical issues to consider are:
 Whether it is ethical to ship products which have possibility of data loss of the clients?
 Whether Rachael’s work of testing the quality of the servers is done ethically?
Who Are the Primary Stakeholders?
The primary stakeholders in the given scenario are:
 Rachael
 The Clients of the company Rachael works for
 The Company which makes chips for the servers that are designed by Rachel’s company.

2
BUSINESS ETHICS
What Are the Possible Alternatives?
The possible alternatives in this scenario are the following:
 Rachael could do quality testing of the servers and not have them shipped until all the
possibilities of mal function and data loss are resolved.
 Rachael can communicate the potential risks, that the clients of the company will be
exposed to if all the necessary tests are not performed on the servers to the management
of the company. She can advise the management that if the potential risks are not
mitigated by the tests, the company’s reputation would suffer a massive blow in case of
malfunction or data loss of the server.
 She can also advice the management to have a meeting with the client and ask for an
extension on the delivery of the product in order to assure that the products delivered to
the clients are defect free.
What Are the Ethics of the Alternatives?
Utilitarianism- From the perspective of the ethical theory of Utilitarianism it can be said that the
act of ensuring that products are defect free would be in the best interest of all the stakeholders
involved in the given scenario. The theory of Utilitarianism states that the actions of individuals
should be aim to create the greatest benefit for most number of people (Alon & Lehrer 2017).
The theory of Utilitarianism takes in to account the utility of actions to assess whether such
action can be considered to be ethical or not. Utility according to this theory can be defined as
the well being of the most number of stakeholders involved in a scenario (de Lazari-Radek and
Singer 2017). Utility is derived by the summation of all the pleasures which results from the

3
BUSINESS ETHICS
actions of individuals minus the efforts involved for performing such actions. Thus it can be said
that if all the tests are conducted not only will it benefit the clients but also the company’s
reputation. Compromising on the quality of the products to compete with the rival companies
can be considered can be considered to be unethical
Rights and Duties- According to the ethical theory of Rights and Duties it can be said that the
actions of individuals must be governed by certain duties (Thompson 2018). Every individual is
a member of the society and thus certain responsibilities are imposed upon individuals and
certain rights are granted to them (Piacquadio 2017). An action of an individual can be
considered to be unethical if such action infringes the right of another person. In this scenario it
can be stated that Rachael has a duty to inspect the quality of the products sold by the company.
The clients of the company have the right to have their personal data protected. Thus if the tests
are not performed by Rachael the rights of the clients would be infringed.
Justice and fairness- According to the perspective of this ethical theory, it can be said that the
actions of individuals must be fair to the other stakeholders in the consideration (Schminke,
Arnaud and Taylor 2015). Justice means giving providing every person with what is deserved by
him (Goldman. and Cropanzano 2015). Thus it can be said it would be unfair and unjust to
provide the clients of the company with products which could be potentially defective.
What Are the Practical Constraints?
The practical constraint involved in this scenario is the shortage of time to conduct al the tests on
the products
What Actions Should Be Taken?

4
BUSINESS ETHICS
Thus in this case Rachael should ensure not to ship the product until all the tests are conducted
on them.
Case Study 2
What Are the Relevant Facts?
The relevant facts in this given scenario are:
 Anne is employed as an electrical engineer at a computer hardware company
 Anne’s co workers and two newly hired employees had been assigned on a new project.
 The newly hired employees had been given prominent roles and had been given
promotions after the completion of the project.
 The coworkers of Anne who had played supporting roles were given not given any
recognition and promotions.
 The co workers of Anne approached her and said that they would resign if the
management of the company did not stop the practice of favoritism.
What are the ethical issues?
The ethical issues that can be identified in the given scenario are:
 Is the act of favoring certain employees by the management ethical?
 Should Anne approach her manager and inform them the intention of her co-workers to
resign if favoritism is continued to be practiced by the management ?
Who Are the Primary Stakeholders?
The primary stakeholders involved in the case scenario are:

5
BUSINESS ETHICS
 Anne
 Anne’s coworkers
 The newly hired employees
 The management of Onerous
What Are the Possible Alternatives?
The possible alternatives in this given scenario are:
 In this given scenario Anne could inform the management about the occurrences of
favoritism in the company
 If it is felt by her that informing the manager about the instances of favoritism being
practiced in the company would be ineffective and futile she could even reach out to the
higher authority to bring it to their attention.
 She should advise her co workers to report their grievances to the management of the
company to bring to their notice.
What Are the Ethics of the Alternatives?
Utilitarianism- According to the principle of Utilitarianism it can be said that the actions of
individuals should be aimed to create the greatest benefit for the most number of people (de
Lazari-Radek and Singer 2017). The theory of Utilitarianism takes in to account the utility of
actions to assess whether such action can be considered to be ethical or not. Utility according to
this theory can be defined as the well being of the most number of stakeholders involved in a
scenario. Utility is derived by the summation of all the pleasures which results from the actions
of individuals minus the efforts involved for performing such actions (Liu, Schucker and Law
2018). Thus by applying the principles Utilitarianism it can be stated that Anne must inform her

6
BUSINESS ETHICS
manager about the grievances of her co workers. The act of informing the management will
create benefits for her co workers as well as other employees of the organization who might be
adversely affected by the practice of favoritism in the workplace. If the management of the
company takes steps to prevent favoritism, it would be beneficial to the majority of the
employees in the company.
Rights and Duties – According to the principles of the ethical theory of rights and duties, it can
be stated that individuals are considered to be members of the society and are granted some
rights (Piacquadio, 2017). However, it is the duty of every individual of the society to respect
and the rights of the others. The actions of individuals would be considered to be unethical if the
same violates the rights of others. Thus in this case it can be said that it is the duty of Anne to
report the problem to the management, otherwise the rights of her co workers would be
infringed.
Justice and Fairness- The theory of justice and Fairness states that it is the duty of every
individual to treat every person fairly ( Gasper 2016). Justice can be defined as giving equal
opportunity every individual. Thus it can be said that the act of favoritism in the company is
inherently unethical as it does not provide equal opportunities to every individual and selected
employees are favored. Thus it is the duty of the Anne to report complaints of her co workers to
her manager and also advice her co workers to report their grievances to the higher authority.
What Are the Practical Constraints?
The practical constraint in this scenario is that the informing the manager would be futile and in
effective as the manager of the company is strongly biased and stubborn
What Actions Should Be Taken?

7
BUSINESS ETHICS
In this case Anne must inform her manager about the grievances of her co workers. She must
advise them to report formal complaints of favoritism to the higher management.
Case three
What Are the Relevant Facts?
The relevant facts that have been identified in the given case study are:
 Victoria is employed as a analyst at a boutique investment bank which has a all male
work environment
 Luke, a senior executive of the bank has been making inappropriate advances to Victoria
 Luke had insisted Victoria to come to his house
 Luke had made a direct advance toward Victoria in is house
 Victoria being upset to be put in such an inappropriate situation by Luke leaves his
house.
What are the ethical issues?
The ethical issues in consideration are:
 Whether Victoria should put up with such inappropriate and personal advances towards
her by Luke, the senior executive?
 Whether Victoria should report the incident to the Human Resource department?
 Whether reporting such incident to the HR department of the firm will jeopardize her
position in the firm since she has to work on the same project as Luke is working on?
Who Are the Primary Stakeholders?

8
BUSINESS ETHICS
The relevant stakeholders in this given scenario are:
 Victoria
 Luke
 The HR manager of the Firm “Bull pen”
What Are the Possible Alternatives?
In the given case study the alternatives that are available to Victoria in relation to the ethical
dilemma faced by her are:
 Victoria can put up with the advances that Luke is making towards her in order to avoid
the creation of any awkward situation in the workplace and to ensure that her position in
the firm is not jeopardized.
 Victoria can more wisely approach the HR manager of the firm Bullpen and report a
complaint of harassment and inappropriate advancement by Luke.
 She can also choose to ignore the incident like it never happened and keep working on
the same project with Luke.
What Are the Ethics of the Alternatives?
Utilitarianism- The theory of Utilitarianism states that the actions of individuals should be aim to
create the greatest benefit for most number of people de( Lazari-Radek and Singer 2017). The
theory of Utilitarianism takes in to account the utility of actions to assess whether such action
can be considered to be ethical or not. Utility according to this theory can be defined as the well
being of the most number of stakeholders involved in a scenario. Utility is derived by the
summation of all the pleasures which results from the actions of individuals minus the efforts

9
BUSINESS ETHICS
involved for performing such actions (Alon & Lehrer 2017). Thus by the application of the
theory of Utilitarianism it can be stated that, the best alternative in the given scenario as available
to Victoria is to complain to the HR manager about the inappropriate advances made by Luke
towards her. Putting up with the harassment would be considered to be inherently unethical and
as it would promote a culture of harassment in the workplace and would encourage Luke to keep
making such inappropriate advances. It can be said that reporting a complaint to HR department
about the incident will not only benefit Victoria in this situation, it would also be beneficial to all
the women in the society.
Rights and Duties- According to this theory of ethics it can be said that individuals in the society
have been granted with some rights and have been imposed with some duties (Thompson 2018).
In this case it can be said that it is an inherent right of Victoria to be not harassed in the
workplace. It is the duty of Luke to not make any inappropriate advances to Victoria which
makes her uncomfortable. Thus Victoria must report the harassment to ensure that her right to
not be harassed is not infringed.
Justice and fairness perspective- From the perspective of justice and fairness it can be said that
every individual has the right to be treated fairly (Gasper 2016). According to the theory Justice
and Fairness it can be said that justice means providing equal opportunities to every person. In
this case, Victoria has been harassed by Luke; therefore she has not received fair and just
treatment like the rest of the employees. The fact that she works in an all male work environment
has made her a victim of harassment and therefore she need to report a complaint t o ensure that
her right to not be harassed is protected.
What Are the Practical Constraints?

10
BUSINESS ETHICS
The practical constraint in this scenario is that the HR manager of the firm ‘Bullpen” is a single
man who shares the same attitude as the firm which promotes all male culture at work.
What Actions Should Be Taken?
The ethical action in this scenario is to report the incident to the HR manager.
Scenario 3
What Are the Relevant Facts?
The relevant facts that have been identified in the given scenario are:
 Ilene Kennedy is employed in a contract sales which sells high end furniture to large
companies in North Caroline
 She has come to know of the strict chain of custody within the contract furniture industry
 The chain in this industry allows furniture manufacturers to sell furniture to the dealers,
dealers in turn sell furniture to the designers and architects who were remodeling the law
firms
 Illene’s boss has forced her to eliminate the dealers and directly contract the client as that
would give them a higher profit margin.
 In many deals Illene had engaged in bidding against designers, dealers and architects she
ad formally worked with
 When she raised the concern to her boss, he boss was not supportive of her.
 However for the last six months of her employment she sold furniture to dealers only as
required by the chain.
What Are the Ethical Issues?

11
BUSINESS ETHICS
The ethical issues in consideration in this given case study are:
1. Is the sales strategy of Illene’s boss unethical or is just a form of aggressive tactic?
2. What Advice should be provided to Ilene regarding her discomfort at work?
3. How could this practice of breaking the chain-of-custody impact the industry?
4. Whether Illene has the obligation to bring broader changes within the system?
5. Is it ethically prohibited for Illene to to go out of the sales chain?
Who Are the Primary Stakeholders?
The relevant stakeholders in this given scenario are:
 Illene
 Illene’s boss
 The dealers, designers and the architects
 The furniture industry
What Are the Possible Alternatives?
The alternatives are:
1. The sales strategy of illene’s boss is not ethical. However, it is competitive and
aggressive tactic.
2. Illene could be advised to perceive the act of increasing the sales revenue by removing
the dealers, designers and architects as unethical and could be thus advised to engage in
fair trading practices

12
BUSINESS ETHICS
3. Breaking the chain of custody could significantly and adversely impact the industry as it
would eliminate the functions of the dealers, designers and architects which would put
them out of work
4. Illene however, does not have the obligation to push broader changes in this industry.
She is not obligated to be responsible for the actions of others. However, she can refrain
from being involved in an unethical practice of trading
5. It is unethical for Ilene to go out of the sales chain
Ethics of the alternatives are:
According to the theory of Utilitarianism which intends to create the greatest benefit for the most
number of people in the society it can be said that the act of illene’s boss is unethical (de Lazari-
Radek and Singer 2017). The business strategy of Illene’s boss intends to put the desiners,
dealers and architects out of business just for increasing the sales revenue. This act not only
adversely affects the designers, dealers and architects, it also impacts the operations of the
furniture industry adversely. Thus by the Utilitarian perspective it is unethical. Illene could thus
be advised according to the Utilitarian perspective not to involve in the unethical trading
perspective under pressure of her boss. However she does not have the obligation to bring
broader changes as she is not responsible for the actions of others.
Assessing the facts of the case from the viewpoint of rights and duties it can be said that Illene
does not have the obligation to conduct business by unethical procedures. It her duty to not
engage in unethical trading practices and conduct business in an ethical manner. Thus, it is
unethical to go out of the sales chain. However she does not have the obligation or duty to push
broader changes as it is not directly related to her.

13
BUSINESS ETHICS
Assessing the facts of the case from the perspective of justice and fairness it can said that it is
unfair and unjust to conduct business the way it is carried on by Illene’s boss. The dealers,
designers and architects would suffer a huge loss if the chain is broken and business is conducted
in an unethical manner. It I only fair that Illene did not succumb to the pressure of her boss and
carried on business in the ethical way by not breaking the chain.
What Are the Practical Constraints?
The practical constraint involved in this scenario is the pressure asserted over Ilene by her boss.
What Actions Should Be Taken?
Thus in the given scenario it can be said that the best action was to conduct business by not
breaking the sales chain which was done by Ilene

14
BUSINESS ETHICS
Bibliography:
de Lazari-Radek, K. and Singer, P., 2017. Utilitarianism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford
University Press.
Alon, S., & Lehrer, E. (2017). Subjective Utilitarianism: Decisions in a social context.
Liu, X., Schuckert, M. and Law, R., 2018. Utilitarianism and knowledge growth during status seeking:
Evidence from text mining of online reviews. Tourism Management, 66, pp.38-46.
Piacquadio, P.G., 2017. A fairness justification of utilitarianism. Econometrica, 85(4), pp.1261-
1276.
Thompson, D.F., 2018. The possibility of administrative ethics. In Classics Of Administrative
Ethics (pp. 79-92). Routledge.
Gasper, D., 2016. Ethics of development.
Schminke, M., Arnaud, A. and Taylor, R., 2015. Ethics, values, and organizational justice:
Individuals, organizations, and beyond. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(3), pp.727-736.
Goldman, B. and Cropanzano, R., 2015. “Justice” and “fairness” are not the same thing. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 36(2), pp.313-318.

15
BUSINESS ETHICS

16
BUSINESS ETHICS