The two ethical dilemmas presented in the simulation involved possible sexual harassment in the workplace and the reporting of inaccurate scientific data. Using a five-step method referred to as the Baird Decision Model, one made the most ethical decision based on four different perspectives. The perspectives, referred to as the Rights and Responsibilities, Results, Relationship, and Reputation Lenses, required one to take into account various aspects when determining the best decision to make for each dilemma. In the case of the Mysterious Roses, the ethical issue presented in the simulation was how the Director of Sales could ensure an employee could talk about possible sexual harassment from a coworker while the Director of Sales treated all employees fairly in the investigation (University of Phoenix, 2013). To address the issue, one used the five-step process, being attentive, intelligent, reasonable, responsible, and reflective (University of Phoenix, 2013). Using the Rights and Responsibilities Lens, one attended to the context by reading all emails, carefully considering all information presented (University of Phoenix, 2013). Next one explored the values in tension to determine a proper statement of the issue (University of Phoenix, 2013). After stating the issue, one determined who were the stakeholders involved. Next the Director of Sales identified his or her duties owed to the stakeholder and determined the degree, low, medium or high, of the impact the decision would have on each stakeholder (University of Phoenix, 2013). In the next step, the Director of Sales acted with courage and chose what he or she believed to be the best option to resolve the issue (University of Phoenix, 2013).
The final step was reflecting on his or her decision (University of Phoenix, 2013). However, when using the Results Lens, after attending to the context, properly stating the issue, and determining the stakeholders involved, one identified the ethical desires of each stakeholder (University of Phoenix, 2013). Next, the Director of Sales chose the best option combining his or her stakeholder impact analysis with his or her knowledge of what will satisfy each stakeholder’s ethical desires (University of Phoenix, 2013). Last, one reflected on his or her decision (University of Phoenix, 2013).
The Rights and Responsibilities perspective leaned toward rationality, influencing the Director of Sales’ decision to inform Gayle the Director of Sales can keep personal matters confidential, but may have to report the problem if it is work-related. The Director of Sales also encouraged Gayle to review the Company Handbook before meeting with him or her. The decision allowed the employee to maintain responsibility for her own actions while the Director of Sales fulfilled his or her duties (University of Phoenix, 2013). The Results perspective leaned toward sensibility, influencing the decision to inform Gayle the Director of Sales cannot guarantee confidentiality until the employee tells the Director of Sales what the issue is. The decision encouraged the employee to talk about the situation so the Director of Sales can assist the employee (University of Phoenix, 2013). In the case of Cold Feet, the ethical issue was how to resolve a false report while preserving the integrity of G-BioSport (University of Phoenix, 2013). Using the five-step process from the Relationship Lens perspective, one attended to the context by reading the emails, carefully considering the information presented, as well as determined the stakeholders involved (University of Phoenix, 2013). Next the Senior Scientist recognized the basic liberties, the right to notice, the right to voice, and the right to have contracts honored, of the members of the community (University of Phoenix, 2013). After recognizing the basic liberties, the Senior Scientist determined which two stakeholders were the most and the least advantaged, combined this knowledge with the identified basic liberties, and chose the best option for resolving the issue (University of Phoenix, 2013). The final step involved reflecting on one’s decision (University of Phoenix, 2013). When using the Reputation Lens perspective, after the Senior Scientist determined the stakeholders, he or she defined his or her own role according to his or her ethical values (University of Phoenix, 2013). Next the Senior Scientist acted with courage, choosing the most ethical option and in the final step, reflected on his or her decision (University of Phoenix, 2013). The Relationship Lens perspective leaned toward rationality, influencing the Senior Scientist to inform Doctor Waters the Senior Scientist will begin an in-house investigation without mentioning the “whistleblower” (University of Phoenix, 2013). The decision based on fairness, allowed the Senior Scientist to follow the letter of policy by confronting his or her colleague and informing the Chief Legal Officer of the situation (University of Phoenix, 2013).
The Reputation Lens perspective leaned toward sensibility, influencing the Senior Scientist to inform Doctor Waters of the concerns without mentioning the “whistleblower” and informing the General Counsel of possible misconduct if Doctor Waters did not admit or explain the problems (University of Phoenix, 2013). In this decision, the Senior Scientist gave his or her colleague the benefit of the doubt and may have to work with the Chief Legal Officer to determine an appropriate method of resolving the issue (University of Phoenix, 2013). The concept of not tolerating sexual harassment in the workplace relates to my workplace because a certain assistant manager briefly dated a line cook. After the line cook ended the relationship, the assistant manager continually commanded the line cook to perform extra duties and reprimanded the line cook for any mistakes made either by the line cook or any other employee as well as insisted the line cook resume dating the assistant manager. The line cook informed the general manager of the situation and requested a transfer to another store. The general manager honored the line cook’s request and disciplined the assistant manager. Although the relationship was consensual between the line cook and assistant manager, after the line cook decided to end the relationship, and the assistant manager continued to pursue the line cook, a sexual harassment issue ensued. Ethical decisions made in the workplace can be difficult for one to make, but the four perspectives or lenses, Rights and Responsibilities, Results, Relationship, and Reputation, along with the Baird Decision Model can make choosing the best action easier. The goal to making the most ethical decision for a dilemma is to minimize any negative effects on any of the stakeholders involved while being attentive, intelligent, reasonable, responsible, and reflective. Depending on which perspective one uses, one will lean toward either rationality, such as with the Rights and Responsibilities as well as the Relationship Lens, or toward sensibility, such as with the Results and Reputation Lens. .
University of Phoenix. (2013). ETHICS GAME: The Mysterious Roses and Cold Feet [Assessment]. Retrieved from the University of Phoenix, ETH316-Ethics and Social Responsibility course website.