Ethical Dilemma

What would you do if you saw a co-worker stealing supplies from the office, or discovered that
another employee was using company time to run a side business? People encounter ethical dilemmas
like these in their workplaces all the time, and while it's usually clear when an employee is doing
something wrong, it's not always clear how to handle the situation.
Dilemmas are complex situations, where there are not clear cut guidelines either in law or religion.
Dough Wallace explains, An ethical dilemma exists when one is faced with having to make choice
among following alternatives:
1. Real alternatives that are equally justiciable
2. Significant consequences on stakeholders in the situation
Pastin defined four major ethics personality types, and noted that each one handles workplace ethics
differently:
1. The Conformist This employee follows rules, rather than questioning authority figures,
and tends to do things "by the book." One might think this ethical type could be counted on to
always do the right thing, but the Conformist might look the other way if higher-up staff
member were acting unethical, since a manager is someone he or she is supposed to obey.
The Conformist will run into work-related ethical conflicts unless his or her organization has
a set of rigid rules and well-defined consequences for not following them.
2. The Navigator When confronted with a situation in which people are behaving
unethically, Navigators rely on their innate ethics sense to guide their actions, even if these
decisions aren't easy. This ethical type has a generally sound moral compass, which gives the
Navigator the flexibility to make choices even unpopular ones. Navigators' ethical sense
imbues them with qualities of leadership, and others learn to respect and count on them. They
will succeed in most organizations but will leave a company that is unethical.
3. The Negotiator Negotiators try to make up the rules as they go along. When faced with a
sketchy situation, such as a co-worker drinking on his or her lunch hour, the Negotiator might
take a wait-and-see attitude to see if the incident affects his or her job in any way, to see if the
drinking gets any worse or to see if anyone else notices. Navigators will encounter ethics-
related trouble if their jobs require them to exercise judgment without guidelines, because
they change the rules according to what seems easiest at the time.
4. The Wiggler The Wiggler doesn't give a lot of thought to what is right, but instead takes
the route that's most advantageous to him or her. For example, Wigglers may lie to appease a
supervisor but refuse to lie again if they sense that others are beginning to suspect the
supervisor. Wigglers are mostly motivated by self-interest getting on a manager's good
side, scoring a better deal for themselves or avoiding conflict. They will run into trouble when
others sense that they dodge ethical issues to protect their own interests.
The BELIEVE IT Strategy
The BELIEVE IT strategy for resolving ethical problems is a step by step process so that others will
be able to BELIEVE and understand your decision. It is based on assessing the principles and values
relevant to a particular problem and results in a decision which is believable and defendable. The
BELIEVE IT strategy is not dependent on whether you have a utilitarian, Universalist or religious
approach; it concentrates on the situation at hand and is aimed at reaching an outcome.
Faced with an ethical dilemma, the following steps can be taken:
Background
State the background of the case including context, its origin and any other important details. What is
the history of the problem? Who is involved? Is there any missing information which you need to
solve the problem?
Estimate
Make an initial estimation of the ethical dilemma present, that is, what the core issues are. What is the
main ethical conflict?
List
List the possible solutions to the problem.
Impact
Consider the likely impacts of each of the initial solutions. What are the outcomes of each solution?
Who will they affect? How will each solution harm or help people?
Eliminate
Eliminate the totally unacceptable solutions eg significant harm to people.
Values
With the remaining possible solutions, assess which values are upheld and violated by each solution.
What are the significant values and principles which are upheld or violated by each solution? What
are the stated organisational values?
Evaluate
Evaluate the solutions considering the likely impacts and the values which will be upheld or violated.
Must determine which values are most important. Why is one solution better or worse than another? Is
there another solution you havent considered?
Decision
Make a decision, state it clearly including why it is best, justify it and defend it against criticism. How
will you carry it out? Who will object to the decision? What are the weaknesses of the decision? How
will you defend the decision?







BELIEVE IT model




Using the BELIEVE IT model, an organisation can train staff to incorporate a set of key values into
their decision making. That is, when assessing the values involved in the dilemma, staff can make
reference to what the organisation has stated that it wishes to be the most important values. In this
way, the approach to resolving ethical dilemmas in an organisation becomes less reliant on individual
value judgements and more reliant on stated organisational values. Additionally, it gives staff a step
by step approach which enables them to resolve ethical dilemmas quickly and in a way that is entirely
justifiable.
Steps in resolving Ethical Dilemmas
Rushworth Kidder has suggested steps for dealing with ethical dilemma:
1. Define the problem/moral issue correctly
2. Determine the people who will be affected by the decision. Also determine your role.
3. Analyze how the events have happened.
4. Test for right vs. wrong issues? Is it illegal? How would you resolve the things if you stood
on the other side.
5. Apply three approaches to resolve the dilemma.
End-based thinking (utilitarianism)
Rule-based thinking
Care-based
6. Investigate, if there is any other way out of the situation
7. Make decision & take action
8. Revisit & reflect on the decision




Caselet (Ethical Dilemma)
Mohammed completed his bachelors in engineering from a renowned institute in the Middle East. He
learnt the nuances of engineering, business and IT, after which he decided to join a conglomerate
having operations all over the world. He was put into the procurement division of the heavy earth
moving equipment Strategic Business Unit (SBU) of the company. Mohammed started to make his
presence felt owing to his determination, hard work and team playing attitude. His integrity and
ethical moves made him the favourite of all the eyes, including the competitors in the marketplace.
These qualities brought him instant fame and recognition and Mohammed was promoted within a
very short period of time. The success achieved within a short span of time made him strive hard to
reach his goals, vis-a-vis those of the organization. However, at times he was at loggerheads,
especially when he tried to superimpose his own aspirations with those of the organization. He
realized that the growth curve of an employee in the organization were based on a whole lot of
factors, including the hard work put in by the concerned employee. This led to the development of a
unique feeling within himself and he thought he was getting stagnant within the organization. At
times he was contemplating to quit and join some other organization so that he continue his fast career
progression, witnessed in the existing company. But he had to shelve those plan, considering the
respect he commanded in the present organization. Moreover, the global recognition of the brand he
was associated to, compelled him to stick around with the current employer. This led to an ethical
dilemma as he visualized getting involved in unethical practices, which would bring him additional
monetary rewards. Being the head of procurement, he was the final authority when it came to opting
for a vendor who is responsible for supplying the raw materials of his organization. Unlike in the past
when his tendering process was transparent and democratic, the new methodology adopted by him
was opaque and barring a few of close associates nobody knew about the details of the supplier or
their produce. The kickback he started to receive from those suppliers made him happy and he was
happy continuing in his exiting role, even without a promotion or recognition, the sole motivator
during his early days. Days, months and years went by, and Mohammed was minting money and
accumulating wealth at a brisk pace. Even his social circles were at loss of words to explain his
sudden change in the societal status. People started to doubt his activities within and outside the
organization, which culminated in a customer lodging a complaint after one of the products
manufactured by Mohammeds company had busted during one the major operations . This led to an
enquiry, which revealed the malpractices involved in the procurement process of the raw materials.
Mohammed was caught red-handed, but the top management was still not ready to buy the agreement
that one of their most ethical, upright employee would turnaround for the worse, so fast. Mohammed
was finally shown the door and was also imprisoned for a month owing to the illegal trade practices
brought in the industry.
Key Issues for Discussion
(1)Analyse the case-let and decipher Mohammed personality right from the beginning till the end.
(2)Why did his persona undergo a sudden change?
(3)How did the ethical issues alter his organizational behaviour?
(4)What would you have done, if you were asked to counsel Mohammed?