C 19202194

BECSR ASSIGNMENT
Case Study: Your star sales person lied. Should he get a second chance?
1. Analyze the context and reflect on ethical issues using the smell test? What is the ethical dilemma?
Answer: In this case, the issue that has been addressed is the violation of the company’s ethics and
their integrity policy that is ‘Health with Integrity’, which is the tagline of this leading pharmaceutical
marketing company violated by Uday, sales representatives. He generated a false report stating that he
had completed the target on 21st June, which was achieved by him but not on exact date.
Using smell test, the ethical issue that has raised is that whether this situation feels right or not. Here
Uday has surely failed to do his duty ethically. Being a star salesperson of the company he could have
easily shared his problem to HR but in order to maintain his status, he failed to share it.
Siddhant’s dilemma is that he can overlook the infraction as Uday is a strong performer and also the
situation happened due to his family crisis or he can fire Uday to maintain the company’s ethics and
their integrity policy.
2. How to go about in resolving the ethical dilemma? Generate options and evaluate the options.
Answer: Using 4x5 matrix we can resolve the ethical dilemma. Here Siddhant has two options: -
1. Fire Uday
2. Not to fire Uday
Firstly, we will evaluate the first option that is to fire Uday by using 4x5 matrix with reason given to
support why some approach is justified and some are not so as to resolve the ethical dilemma.
If Uday is fired
Utilitarian Rights Fairness Common Good Virtue

Approach Approach Approach Approach Approach
Company might Siddhant has Unethical action As we don’t Siddhant has

lose the always lead a done by Uday know if this was always
customer. principled life. might destroy Uday’s first time prided
Private
company’s to fudge his himself for
Individual reputation report.. being ethical.
Because of the Shareholders do To build and To maintain Trust is

breach have some rights maintain trust in maintained
welfare for
shareholder i.e. some inside work when value
Economic might not invest
entire
info also they relationship. shareholders & and beliefs
Agent in future can sue for False report are actively
organization.
wrongful acts. shouldn’t be managed.
sent.
Siddhant was a To set an As the company It might create Here, we can

man of principle. example to has zero trust issue for say Siddhant
encourage and tolerance policy shareholder to is righteous
Company invest or not in a
inspire others to for violation. indignation
Leader do ethical Firing uday will company where person.
activity. justify fairness violation has
approach happened.
This could All people If policy is not This may bring If Uday is not
increase positive should be treated maintained, benefit to fired, then
impact within equally for the employees customers and Siddhant will
Boundary
organization. betterment of would surely set an example be
Spanner society raise an ethical for employees. questionable
concern. to customers
as well as
employees.
Evaluating the second option that is not to fire Uday comes out to be vice versa of the above option.
3. Chose the best option and justify your choice of action.
Answer: According to me and with the help of 4x5 matrix, we can say that Siddhant should fire Uday
for violating company’s ethics and their integrity policy. Ignoring the mistake done by Uday could
lead to unethical practises in future, which needs to be avoided to maintain the reputation of the
company. Also we cannot say if this is the first time Uday has fudge his report. And it would be unfair
to all the employees in Novacib under justice and fairness approach.
Siddhant, CEO also represents as a leader who believes in ethical activity and that is why he should
hold his emotions and do his duty in order to remain candor.
Learning from this case study is that even if you trust your people and hope that they will do the right
thing is not enough because hope is not a management strategy. Which could lead to unethical practise
from employees.

C 19202194

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

C 19202194

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

C 19202194

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BECSR ASSIGNMENT

Utilitarian Rights Fairness Common Good Virtue

Company might Siddhant has Unethical action As we don’t Siddhant has

Because of the Shareholders do To build and To maintain Trust is

Siddhant was a To set an As the company It might create Here, we can

You might also like