Business, Ethical and Legal issues
Business, Ethical and Legal issues
Rob's situation with Dusty puts him in a dilemma. The community, customers and board members of the firearms company exert pressure on him to relieve Dusty of his duties owing to his past as a criminal record after the exposure by a local publication following a tip from Dusty's former crime mate T-rex. On the other hand, Dusty has been exemplary in his job and has even been an important figure in the community owing to his voluntary service. Furthermore, Rob is aware that he has reformed and has already atoned for his crime by serving a prison sentence. In light of the situation, Rob is supposed to make a decision on whether to relieve Dusty of his duties. Before making a recommendation to Dusty on what decision he should take, I would evaluate all of his options based on the Badaracco ethical analysis. It involves asking the four critical questions that touch on character, pragmatism, consequences and the rights of the defendant, in this case, Dusty.
The question of consequence borrows mainly from the utilitarian view, which advocates that an action is considered moral if it offers the greatest possible good to the greatest possible number of people (Badaracco, 2003). There will certainly be consequences that follow either party regardless of the decision that Rob makes. If Rob chooses to fire Dusty, he will be relieved from the pressure of the board and the shareholders, and this will be a win for him on the basis of consequence. Furthermore, the public, in general, will be contented. However, such a decision, apart from making Dusty lose his source of income will also soil his image in the eyes of the public. As such, engaging with others would be difficult and would he would most likely not find an alternative source of income. It will affect Dusty's standard of living. It is, therefore, obvious that if utilitarianism is to be considered, the board members, shareholders, and the public outnumber Dusty and as such the logical decision would be to fire him.
The second question on pragmatism borrows from Machiavelli's principle. The most realistic option for Rob would be to relieve Dusty of his duties. It is because it makes much more sense to lose one person rather than having to lose the support of many. Furthermore, keeping him on the board may lead to the company losing customers due to the public outcry and as such a drop in sales. As the CEO of the company, Rob has a duty to ensure that company's sales are optimized. Such a decision would also increase Rob's probability of staying on the job. The other unlikely option would be for Rob to leave the company in a bid to avoid making the decision. However, it would have solved the problem at hand, as calls for Dusty's ouster would still emanate from the board, the customers and the public.
The third question under Badaracco ethical analysis is concerned with the right of the defendant. Despite his previous past in crime, Dusty has already suffered retribution for his crime after serving an eight-and-a-half-year-old prison sentence. Furthermore, there are no laws in the nation that prohibit ex-offenders from holding any position of power as long as they are no longer engaged in crime. They also have the right to gainful employment. Rob can also claim that Dusty has the right to have personal space especially regarding his past so long as it does not directly affect his current duties and responsibilities in the company.
Aristotle is famous for his stance that an action is considered ethical if it is conducted by a person of good character surrounded by an environment that is good enough to allow the person make that good decision (Badaracco, 2003). Furthermore, he argues that a good action is spontaneous and is not dependent on the multiplicity of factors that usually encompass decision-making. Having interacted with Dusty, Rob knows his character in particular through his service to the community. Furthermore, were it not for the publication aided by T-rex, no one within the company and the community would have faulted the character of Dusty. Also, a person's character is more informed by his current behavior rather than their behavior in the past. Under such circumstances, the ethical decision for Rob to undertake would be to retain the services of Dusty.
The four questions present various options and counter options for Rob. The decision he has to make will not only affect him individually but also the shareholders, other board members, customers, and the public too. Having considered all the options, I would recommend that Rob chooses not to dismiss Dusty on the strength of Aristotle view on good character. While the decision will have implications for everyone including Rob himself, it is the only one that has the greatest likelihood of affording him peace of mind, which in turn will serve to increase his happiness. Dismissing Dusty would politically correct for Rob to the board and shareholders but would, however, leave him with the psychological burden of firing a hitherto morally upright person.
Organizational Environment
Fantasia is faced with a defining decision, which will have a long-term impact on the operations of her business Fantasia's Phantastic Fancies (FPF). In deciding whether or not to accept the funding from the investment firm, she has to take into account several factors. Some of the factors include her target market, pricing, return on investment and the possible dilution of her brand due to mass production. However, most importantly she has to decide on the organizational structure of the expanded business (Hermant, 2011). FPF produces specialty products often through made-to-order. Hitherto, the target market for FPF's product has been the affluent. It is because of the exclusivity that the business has been able to sell at premium prices. If Fantasia opts to expand the business, it will certainly lead to an exponential rise in production. With high production, she will not be able to charge the premium prices commanded through exclusivity and as such she will have to contend with lower margins. The business' focus should then be to sell high volumes.
The reduction in the prices would also be as a result of the dilution in the brand worthiness which will be brought about by the fact that the products will be readily available. Furthermore, Fantasia should ensure that the return on investment remains high, and this may be achieved through stringent cost management. In light of all these factors, she has to choose an organizational structure that will help strike a balance between maintaining high production and at the same time maintaining high brand visibility to increase margins. An efficient organizational structure is even more significant considering that if she decides to raise production, she will have to contend with a higher number of employees. It will require skills in managing people.
One of the approaches to the classical organizational theory is Weber's ideal for bureaucracy (Hermant, 2011). Under this model, rules and regulations within the business reign supreme. It seeks to establish a strict hierarchy that must be adhered to all the time. The advantage of this approach is that it will enable Fantasia to have better control and co-ordination of the business. It also has well-defined responsibilities creating an efficient system in which each employee has an idea of their role and the process through which to report in the event of an issue. However, the downside to this approach is that the strict rules and regulations do not always take into account human errors and variations that may occur due to differences in personality and approaches by different workers. It envisions an almost perfect system which is not tenable in the real world.
The rational system perspective seeks to create specific goals and objectives for the company (Hermant, 2011). Resources to achieve the set goals are then allocated to each employee who is then allowed a free hand in achieving the goal with the only constraint being the level of resources allocated. It also includes an incentive system for the employees. Furthermore, it seeks to match each employee with their roles in which they have demonstrated their strengths. The advantage of this approach to FPF would be that it will give the employee some space in creating the products considering that they require a personal touch. It also eliminates the bureaucratic nature which is present in the classical organizational theory. The downside to this approach is that the employees will always be required to work at optimum levels under the incentive system. It is humanly impossible and may end up discouraging the employees.
Another approach to organizational structure is the division of labor. Under the approach, employees are allocated roles often depending on the level of their competencies (Hermant, 2011). When well-managed, it is useful in enhancing specialization among the employees. It should be especially important for FPF that its production process is sub-divided given that it is concerned with creative industry which requires highly specialized artisans for the different roles. The downside to the division of labor as an approach for organizational management is that it may result in boredom and monotony for the employees. It is due to the repetitive nature of the roles they are expected to undertake.
The contingency approach to organizational structure is more pragmatic and may suit Fantasia in running the expanded business. The approach is based on the premise that errors and conflicts are inevitable within an organization. It seeks to minimize conflicts and other internal constraints. The approach also opines that there is no proven successful way in which to manage an organization and as such copy and paste solutions would not work in merely any organization. Performance is dependent on the leadership style coupled with the work environment. Such an approach would allow Fantasia to manage the expanded company in her own leadership style with which she is comfortable.
Taking into consideration all the organizational approaches and other factors, it would be imperative that Fantasia accepts the deal with the investment firm to expand the business. She would, however, have to contend with lower prices and margins too for her products. In a bid to cover up for the lower prices and margins, she would have to ensure high volumes are sold which would call for better marketing which thanks in part to Fantasia's appearance on the reality show has been taken care of by chance. The most optimal approach for her would be the division of labor as it would enable her point out particular aspects of the products to specific employees which would, in turn, enable her to engage with them one on one. It is especially the case so as to ensure that the products do not lose the personal touch of specialty goods.
Critical Thinking
The issue at hand is the contention over who among a list of directors is the best of them all. The conclusion according to the speaker is that Stephen Spielberg is the best director ever to grace the movie theaters.
The reasoning behind the conclusion is that he has watched many movies and as such has the authority to determine who happens to be the best director. He is also of the opinion that since his cousin Vinnie has watched many more movies than he has and agrees that Spielberg is the best director, then it must be the case that he is indeed the best director.
The value assumption that the argumentator makes is that his personal admiration of Stephen Spielberg's movies influences his reasoning and as such, his conclusion that Spielberg must be the best director.
He commits several fallacies including negative conclusion from the affirmative premise (Munson, 2016). The affirmative premise is that Stephen Spielberg directs good movies; however, it would be wrong to draw the conclusion that just because he directs good movies, then he must be the best director. The second fallacy is the appeal to probability that merely because Spielberg has directed a great number of movies that have been successful, then the conclusion must be that he is the best director. The other fallacy committed is argumentum ad hominem (Munson, 2016) in which he attacks the opponents of his conclusion by calling them, idiots. As such, he has already concluded that they are idiots regardless of reasoning that they might be willing to offer.
The evidence presented is unsatisfactory. He does not show any evidence supported by empirical research rather it is merely personal opinions. Furthermore, there might be rival causes that he had not considered. They might include the fact that genres of movies are different, and so are the directors hence an attempt to rate them would not have any justified cause.
Business Associations, Agency, and Torts
Taking all the factors into consideration, the most effective form of a business association for X-flies would be a sole- proprietorship. It is especially the case considering that it is a new business in a relatively new field of flying drones. As such, a sole- proprietorship would be most effective as it would afford me the opportunity to have one on one, hands-on touch in the business. It would allow fully grasp all the aspects of the business even as X-flies positions itself to be a leader in the market and perhaps incorporate in the long-run.
Also, a sole-proprietorship offers me a chance to have complete control over the business a privilege that I would lose if I were to bring investors on board. Furthermore, the process of business registration for a sole-proprietorship is less costly and less bureaucratic as opposed to other forms of business associations. The paperwork is minimal. Given that it is a new business with financial constraints, the favorable tax treatment on sole-proprietorships will go a long way in subsidizing some of the costs.
The downside to this form of a business association is that as the owner of X-flies I would bear unlimited personal liability especially on the loans that I would have to take to fund the business. Despite the downside, the advantages of a sole-proprietorship outweigh the benefits posed by other forms of business associations such as incorporating a company, partnership or allowing venture capitalists into the business. These other associations would lead to me losing control of the business, which will also reduce the personal touch that I intend the business to have. Furthermore, there is a lot of bureaucracy in setting up the other business associations.
Fonzie committed a tort by his van running over Trisha's redwood fence. It is because Trisha suffered a legal injury as she suffers economic harm occasioned by the damaged fence causing adverse publicity to her business. To that extent, Fonzie bears a legal responsibility as it was occasioned by his negligence. However, the issue at hand is complex as Fonzie was working on behalf of X-flies forcing Trisha to claim for payment from me. Legally, Fonzie and X-flies are connected through the law of agency.
The law of agency covers both contractual and non-contractual fiduciary relationships in which an agent (Ibbetson, 2009); in this case Fonzie acts on behalf of the principal; X-flies in transacting business with a third-part-y. X-flies has implicitly entered into a non-contractual agreement with Fonzie by him transacting business with third parties on behalf of the business at a fee. Legally, a business acts through an employee carrying out the mandate of the principal, in this case, expenditure incurred by the agent can be charged to the principal (Ibbetson, 2009). The principal, X-flies, has a liability to the agent if the expenditure incurred has an effect of promoting the principal's business. However, in this case, Fonzie's act of negligence do not result in the promotion of X-flies business and as such, I am not legally mandated to pay the cost of repairing Trisha's fence. It is rather the responsibility of Fonzie.
However, from an ethical perspective, it is right that I cater for the costs of repairing Trisha's fence. Despite Fonzie receiving a fee for the assistance he rendered to X-flies, he is first and foremost a friend. Furthermore, he did not intentionally intend not to set the breaks to his van that ended up damaging the fence. The act on Trisha's fence also impacts on the image of X-flies and it would be imperative that I settle the matter as fast as possible.
References
Badaracco, J, L. (2003). Defining Moments: A Framework for Moral Decisions. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing Class Lecture. Electronic. (Faculty Lecture: HBSP Product Number 2861C.)
Ibbetson, D. (2009). Tort: English Common Law in The Oxford International Encyclopedia of Legal History, vol. 5. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Hemant, S. (2011). The Production of Modernization: Daniel Lerner, Mass Media, and the Passing of Traditional Society. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Munson, R. (2016). The Elements of Reasoning. Boston: Cengage Learning
