While the case clearly shows that Jack’s actions can be questioned from the ethical point of view, Carla is the one facing the real ethical issue. On the one hand she has to reveal Jack’s deeds, which could jeopardize company’s future; however, on the other hand her words might not convince the partners, but will harm her career. The main stakeholders in the case are Carla and Jack, who are directly involved in the issue. Moreover, the problem also concerns the shareholders of A&A, its employees and customers as well as Jack’s clients.
Ethical Philosophy
Although the issue described in the Fact Pattern has multiple approaches, in my opinion in this situation it is reasonable to adhere to the utilitarian thinking. According to utilitarianism the course of action should be determined by the final outcome and with regard to the consequences. Since Carla has no physical evidence against Jack, her words will not have much effect on the partners, while they may harm her career or at least the relationships with Jack. Instead, she could observe the development of the situation for a while and collect solid evidence of Jack’s actions. Until she has physical proof of her words, Carla will only worsen the situation for all the shareholders by telling the truth: Jack will be under constant suspicion, partners will not trust their employees, while Carla might lose her job or risk her relationships with Jack.
Perception
Even though utilitarian approach does not fit into the deontological approach to ethics, which dictates strict adherence to the rules, utilitarianism is nevertheless the thinking necessary for “survival” in the described situation. Once revealed, it might be frowned upon by the society and the organizations, since it does not fall into the common framework of right and wrong. However, the consequences of not following this pattern of actions may be detrimental both for Carla and Jack, as well as may harm all the other shareholders.
