The exact meaning of ethics is hard to captur because it is fluid. What is “ethical” varies from place to place depending on the culture and so it would be an exercise in futility to essay to make a case for some universal code of ethics and pass that around as the standard. The most that could be done is to describe ethics in terms that people everywhere will agree with - like to say that ethical behavior aims to create harmonious coexistence between individuals in a social setting- but then leave it to the local cultures to decide which behaviors these are. A lot of people also confuse ethics with religion and laws; they are not. We can only hope that our laws reflect the ethical standards that we think are important. Ethics, then, refers to a body of standards of wrong and right, borne, not out of a requirement to obey a rule but for the sake of goodness and justice and fairness alone to one and to others.
In this paper, I examine the ethical question in the case of Lisa Deuel, a certified public accountant and a staff accountant for Bratz and Bratz, a local CPA firm. We examine whether it was ethical either for her or her firm to act as they acted - as well as the case of Bailey Mills who recently won a lottery in New Jersey while visiting his parents and has been presented with three options of how to receive his payments.
This analysis and the way of looking at the situation are by no means universal. It can only reflect the author’s idea of ethics.
Going back to our definition of ethics for an anchor on which to base our analysis, we can ask ourselves a few questions about Lisa: is she doing this only because their vacation bonus was reduced? Is there need for the extra hours that she is putting after the regular work period? Is she honestly serving the firm by working the extra hours or is she just serving her self-interest at the expense of the company? And is she keep the company honor policy?
The answers to these questions will help any observer to the situation determine whether Lisa’s action is ethical. Lisa is doing this just because their vacation bonus was reduced and not because she wants to help the firm grow. The article says that “Lisa decided she would make up the lost bonus week by working extra six hours of overtime per week” (Warren et al, 2009, p. 535). This clearly shows what informed her decision. There is also not a need for extra hours by the firm because there are very little client service demands at that time of the year and so Lisa is not being honest with her work. She is just serving her own interests but disguising that as serving the company. Since she is not honest about her work at the company, she is going against company honor policy. Her actions are hurting the company and so are not ethical.
The firm did not break any law since it is its rights to change company policy on anything. That, however, does not mean that everything done with these powers is ethical. The situation is not very clear for two reasons. First, it is not known whether the decision to reduce the holiday bonus for employees was done because the company was facing economic hardships. May be the decision was made because the company needed to cut down on expenses. Still, it is not known if the decision accrued because the new management did not like that policy. If the former is the case, then it could be ethical because change benefits everyone in the company. If, however, the latter was the case then it is both unethical and selfish.
Bailey Mills recently won a jackpot in a lottery but has been presented with three options of how to pick his winnings: receive 40,000,000 dollars in cash today or receive 10,000,000 in cash today and 3,600,000 dollar installments each year for ten years or receive 5,000,000 dollars per year, for twenty years with the first payment made a year from now. Given that the effective rate of interest is 10%, in ten years, if he invests, the first option will give him a total of:
${40,000,000 + (40,000,000 * 0.1 * 10)} = $ 80,000,000
that is, principal plus simple interest. It is not quite so easy because Bailey might want to do some other things with his money that will not earn him any money back, like go for a vacation some nice place. There is also the danger of the money losing value due to effects inflation.
The third option results in the most amount of money in the long run - $ 100,000,000 – but it is not desirable for two reasons: the amount of time involved before even the first payment is made is too long and when it does come it is little. Also, the amount received per year is fixed; it does not reflect issues of the day like inflation and so there might come a time when the $ 5,000,000 wouldn’t seem like much.
The second option, which i favor, is well spread-out. $ 10,000,000 now is a lot of money. I could invest it somewhere while still waiting and thinking about other investment options that I could explore the rest of the money yet to come. I think that this is the best option because it is moderate; not so much money changes hands at the same time and I also don’t have to wait too long before getting the first payment.
Conclusion
Issues of ethics as well as situations that require that we make choices out of competing interests are things that individuals and businesses face every day. People should develop ways of ensuring that they make the best choices when situations when ethical situations come their way.
Warren, C. S., Reeves, J. M., & Duchak, J. (2009). Accounting. Mason: Cengage
Learning.
