Individual assignment
Name: Shermaine Wan Zhen Xuan
ID: 20042099
Ethical dilemma in the workplace
From the interview, "Andrew" has encountered an ethical dilemma at her workplace. Andrew's
colleague is a manager, "Sheryl" at a retail store, and she is responsible for hiring new
employees. Sheryl announced a new position at the company and invited employees to apply.
Meanwhile, Sheryl's brother is a fresh graduate seeking employment and wants her sister to
hire him. Although several candidates were qualified for the job, Sheryl decided to hire her
brother regardless of his experience being less extensive than some other applicants.
After Sheryl's brother commenced working at the store, Andrew and other employees noticed
he received preferential treatment from the sister. For instance, Sheryl’s brother is given more
hours of break than other employees and is more lenient towards the job's workload. Over time,
it becomes clear that the brother is not working hard as well as Andrew and the other employees
working there. Despite this, the manager continues to give preferential treatment and even
promotes him to a higher position. Hence, Andrew was outraged and thus reported the nepotism
situation to higher authorities and threatened to terminate Sheryl.
Identification of the virtue and vices
Andrew's behaviour in reporting on Sheryl is considered bravery. Andrew has the courage to
speak up about the nepotism concern. According to Aristotle's golden mean, the excess of
bravery may identify as the vice of rashness. When Andrew threatens Sheryl, this may
negatively impact the team morale and productivity as it could damage the individual's and the
organisation's reputation. Besides, this action of Sheryl raises indignation, which creates a
culture of injustice and undermines the merit-based system essential for a healthy and
productive workplace. The deficiency of indignation can also create resentment and bitterness
among employees, ultimately harming an organisation's overall performance and success. Envy
can lead to unhealthy competition and a lack of collaboration among coworkers, hindering
productivity and innovation. Also, the excess of indignation could lead to retributive
consequences in the workplace, such as disciplinary action may be necessary and lead to legal
issues for the company. This creates a hostile work environment between them that can lead to
a decline in productivity and morale. In a nutshell, both of the vices would consequences to
negative effects if it is not balanced between Aristotle's golden mean.
Analysis of the virtues and vices
Diagram (a)
The virtue in this scenario is bravery, which lies between the extremes of cowardice (deficiency)
and rashness (excess), as shown in diagram (a) above. Andrew’s behaviour may be perceived
as rash by other employees. However, suppose Andrew lacks bravery and does not confront the
issue like other employees, he will miss the opportunity to advocate to contribute to resolving
nepotism. He would be unable to stand up for himself and advocate for the organization leading
to feelings of powerlessness and frustration.
Diagram (b)
According to diagram (b) above, another virtue in this scenario is indignant, which lies between
the extremes of envious (deficiency) and retributive (excess). Suppose Andrew lacks the virtue
of indignation; in this case, the deficiency of indignation will lead to the envy of other
employees towards Sheryl's brother and apathy towards the injustice and unfairness. For
example, if Andrew witnessed an act of preferential treatment but failed to speak up or take
action, it may be complicit in allowing nepotism to continue. In contrast, Andrew's actions may
exhibit an excess of indignation. In this case, a sense of indignation arises when Andrew raises
concerns to the authority about the nepotism issue. The excess of this virtue will trigger
retributive action towards Sheryl and her brother. This can result in a loss of credibility and
effectiveness in addressing the issue. For example, Andrew was outraged by injustice and
responded aggressively; it may end up causing more harm than good to Sheryl and her brother.
Potential solution to the dilemma
The solution to nepotism based on cultivating virtues would involve promoting ethical
character traits and virtues such as fairness, justice, and impartiality. It is recommended to
establish clear policies and guidelines for recruiting and promoting based on qualifications
rather than personal relationships or preferences. Sheryl should follow a fair and transparent
recruitment process with objective criteria for evaluating candidates, such as education,
experience, skills, and performance. Establishing a culture of professionalism and
accountability that values transparency, fairness, and diversity is also essential to reduce
indignation between employees. In this case, Sheryl should model ethical behaviour and hold
themselves and others accountable for upholding high standards of professionalism and
integrity. On the other hand, Andrew should also assess the situation with more evidence before
reacting and try to communicate respectfully instead of acting rashly. By doing so, the
atmosphere at the workplace will be harmonious and create a productive work environment
based on mutual respect, trust, and fairness. Overall, it is essential that the virtue of bravery
and indignation in nepotism lies in choosing to act with integrity and upholding ethical
principles, while avoiding excess or deficiency.
(800 words)
Appendix 1: Consent Form
INTERVIEW%20CON
SENT%20FORM.docx