CONFIDENTIAL CASE STUDY COURSE : BUSINESS ETHICS COURSE CODE : PBS2243 DUE DATE : WEEK 4 INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS: 1. The assignment is covered CLO2 - which allocates 20% of carry marks. This is a group assignment. 2. Each group is required to identify and discuss the problems and issues in the case study given. 3. Before answering the questions below or discussing the case with others, try and work through systematically the Case-study Analysis. 4. Students need to prepare a written document (report). 5. The assignment must be type-written and following guideline; Font (Arial ’11) / Spacing (1.5 lines) / Sheet Margin (Justify) / Page Number (bottom of the page / center). 6. The assignment should be submitted on week 4 th. 7. Plagiarism, copying and cheating will not be tolerated, where marks will be deducted and disciplinary actions can be taken. CONFIDENTIAL 0424/CASE STUDY/PBS2243 CONFIDENTIAL CASE: An Ethical Dilemma Jon graduated from college with a degree in operations and logistics after he returned from deployment with the army. His work in the military prepared him well as a manager in operations and logistics, and it showed when he was hired at AlumaArc, a manufacturing facility that produced various tank parts for the U.S. Army. Jon's coworkers and fellow managers at his company respected him for the proficiency he showed in his work. Within 18 months, Jon became the key person in the logistics department, and a few months after that, he became one of 20 managers in charge of the third shift. Above him were two assistant general managers (AGMs) and the general manager. The plant employed 2,000 general workers and several hundred specialists. Recently, the U.S. Army asked AlumaArc to step up production. This meant adding another shift with existing personnel and a number of incentives for increased productivity. At first, Jon was happy with the new business AlumaArc was getting. However, as he began examining the amount of output required to meet the army's expectations, he grew concerned. Even with overtime, the plant would still find it difficult to meet output goals running at maximum capacity. He also noticed many of the workers appeared worn out. Because the plant had heavy equipment that required workers to take safety precautions, it was standard procedure for workers to review a checklist on a tablet, marking off the different safety procedures before they began operating machinery. One day, Jon noticed the checklist for his shift hadn't been filled out. He asked Jasmine, one of the employees, about why it hadn't been done. “Oh, we’ve been so busy lately trying to meet our production quota that George told us we could just skip it”, Jasmine explained. George was one of the AGM’s. “But these checklists are used to make sure you’re operating safely,” Jon responded. Jasmine looked grim. "Well, if we filled them out, we'd just be lying anyway." She informed Jon that to save time, the workers were encouraged to bypass standard safety procedures. Additionally, Jon was horrified to realize many of the workers were not taking their required breaks in order to get rewarded for increasing their output. Later that day, Jon confronted George. "George, these incentives are encouraging careless and unsafe behaviours. Employees are skipping safety procedures and breaks to get the work done. It's only a matter of time before someone gets seriously hurt." George looked firmly at Jon. “I realize there are potential risk, but we can’t afford to hire additional workers right now. If we can just meet this output, it’ll increase our business tenfold. We’ll be able to hire new workers and pay our current employees more.” Jon was stunned. “But these are people we are putting at risks!” George sighed. “Jon, each worker has a choice whether or not they take advantage of these incentives. They are not being forced to do anything they don’t want to do. Besides these are not my rules. The GM put these incentives in place. It’s really out of my control. Just think about it. We’re doing it for the greeter good of our company and our employees.” 2 CONFIDENTIAL 0424/CASE STUDY/PBS2243 CONFIDENTIAL Jon replied, "But if they refuse, they are probably afraid they'll lose their jobs. And even if they do feel the risks are worth it, isn't it our job to make sure they have safe work conditions?" Although George continued to reassure him, Jon left George's office determined to enforce all safety protocols and force his employees to take their required breaks. He figured if top management would not consider the wellbeing of the employees, he would do what he could to protect those who fell under his authority. Later that week, George came up to Jon and said, "I'm sorry to tell you this, but your shift is not meeting the required output levels. We need to meet these deadlines quickly and accurately, and your shift has always been our fastest. Without you, we're never going to get the work done on time. That means we'll have to start laying off employees who aren't performing up to expectations." Jon recognized George's veiled threat but refused to compromise his workers' safety. Meanwhile, he began hearing stories of employees getting injured on other shifts. Jon decided to talk to Allie, the general manager. He knew she probably was not pleased with him, but he felt it necessary to try to persuade her about the dangers of what the company was doing. Jon wondered how he should approach Allie. If he was not careful, she could fire him. He did not want to be disrespectful, but he also didn't want to be a part of a company that knowingly put their employees in harm's way. Discussion Questions 1. Identification of the main issues in the case and describe of Jon’s moral dilemma. 2. Analysis of the issues: In AlumaArch’s reasoning, the benefits of increasing production outweigh the risks of potential injuries. How could this approach potentially backfire? 3. How should Jon approach the situation by relating it to the theories and concepts in Chapter 4? 4. Provide suggestions on appropriate solutions. END OF QUESTIONS 3 CONFIDENTIAL 0424/CASE STUDY/PBS2243 CONFIDENTIAL ASSIGNMENT FORMAT Written Report NO. CRITERIA FULL MARKS 1. Cover page (refer sample) - 2. Table of Content - 3. Identification of main issues / problems 5 4. Analysis of the issues 5 5. Provide suggestions on appropriate solutions 5 6. Relate to theories / concepts 5 7. Reference - TOTAL 20 marks (20%) 4 CONFIDENTIAL 0424/CASE STUDY/PBS2243 CONFIDENTIAL Example of Cover Page BUSINESS ETHICS (PBS2243) Case Study Group Members: Students Name ID. Number Class / Section : Program : Diploma in Office Management (AO101) Prepared For : (Lecturer Name) Dateline : 5 CONFIDENTIAL 0424/CASE STUDY/PBS2243
