A.
This case is about morals and employer versus employee conflict of interest. Its focal point is twenty eight years old, Elaine Hunt--a recently promoted senior financial manager--whose husband, Dennis is involved in export-import business. Being in charge of ten branch loan office managers, Elaine Hunt is charged with the responsibility of signing–off loans well over $500,000. Nonetheless, the signing off of larger loans must be authenticated by the United Bank Cooperation’s vice president. The case focuses principally on conflicting morals. It is evident that Elaine Hunt makes several financial business decisions which are impacting negatively to the business’ bottom line. Besides, Elaine makes several financial decisions that negatively affect her husband’s line of business. Same decisions as well negatively affect United Bank Cooperation financial obligations, and Elaine’s career in the company as a senior financial manager. The case further gets complicated by the adverse effects Elaine’s financial decisions have on Elaine and Dennis’ spousal financial obligations. The import-export financial decisions Elaine passed made her husband’s commission begin to slip and thereby interfering with the family’s projected cash flow. Worse still, the family is likely to lose their new home, fall behind financial payments as well as reduce their child’s educational options. Over the whole, conflict of interest, honesty, fairness and integrity cut across the case study.
B.
Conflict of interest
Integrity
Elaine’s integrity is doubtable. She is not consistent with her actions and principles. She is not honest and truthful in her actions and principles as the financial manager of the company. Her consistency of principles slips down when she signs off a loan to ABCO even though the company’s debt equity ratio was not in line with the company’s standards—the standards initially formulated by Elaine herself for the company. This act portrays lack of integrity.
Fairness
Elaine is not fair in her financial decisions. Besides, the same moral stance bars her from approving the loan to the Canadian company on the grounds that the said company was exporting cigars. Also, lack of fairness is perceived in the case when she approves the ABCO’s loan even though the company’s debt equity ratio was not in line with the company’s standards.
C.
2. The ethical and legal consideration facing Elaine, Dennis and UBC is basically a misplaced conflict of interest, truth, transparency and corporate social responsibility. There is real and perceived conflict of interest both from Elaine, Dennis and UBC. Elaine is portrayed as not being free from her company’s activities and therefore ends up compromising her integrity. This completely destroys her credibility in the company. Elaine as well violates her fiduciary responsibility to UBC. There is also misleading financial decision making as well as financial fraud by Elaine. Conversely, UBC is perceived as not being concerned about the rights and the liabilities of its citizens, more so to the children’s rights. This is the reason for its dire need to approve loan to Graphco, which promotes tobacco products to children. UBC lacks corporate social responsibility.
3. The moral philosophy relevant to this situation is honesty, fairness, integrity and corporate social responsibility. Honesty is the best policy. We should do to others what we expect them to do to us. We should not have conflicting interest. We should always stick to the best interest. We should not lie, cheat or be unfair while making decisions.
D.
If I were Elaine, I would definitely explain my stand to the company, especially to the vice president before authenticating a given transaction. I would at all times however stick to my moral standards even if it means seeking the job elsewhere. Despite the fact that the family’s financial obligations may be slipped off, standing with my morals may earn me value in another company whose values may be consistent with mine.
Reference
The given case study.
