Approaches to Ethics for Public Administrators

Ethical Scenario Summary 

The case scenario involved a friend (Eric) who was, at the time, working as an assistant manager at a retail clothing store. He was aware of several cases that happen in institutions involving insider theft. His manager, who was a long-time friend, had helped him secure the job opportunity. Eric was tasked with maintaining all paperwork details that involve organization deposits, customer returns, and inventory records. According to his daily observations, the cash drawer had often been short by some few dollars, and at the same time, one common customer had unusual bogus returns. The entire staff in the institution was made up of six people, including Eric, and the manager. At some point, everyone becomes aware of the problems, and the manager mentions that sales associates are ones responsible. Surprisingly to Eric, the customer with bogus returns comes with items that lack receipts for an exchange, but he denies to offer the change due to lack of purchase proof. At this point, the manager realizes that Eric is aware of the fishy business and backs off, claiming that he doesn’t know the particular customer. 

Key positions that had been assigned in this cloth-retail business are the manager and assistant manager positions. These positions are in charge of keeping the paperwork related to the company's inventories and also leading the entire staff. Tittles in the company are the leadership board, which consists of the manager and the assistant manager, and sales associates who are the subordinate workers. Lastly, responsibilities are the duties and roles that each person in the entire staff must perform for the success of the entity. 

During the scenarios, several individual pressures were experienced by each party involved. For instance, the manager faced the highest pressure from the rest of the company members when it became known that some financials had not been adding up and that he was in charge of all matters that involved expenditures, inventories, and other financials. However, despite experiencing this pressure, he passed on to the assistant manager, who successfully handled it by dealing with the evident case where a customer had bogus returns, which were unusual. Eric, the assistant manager, faced individual pressure on realizing that financials were not adding up, and indeed, that was his duty to ensure that all records and paperwork on inventory records should be well kept. He handled the pressure by dismissing the client who happened to be causing the arrears. 

During the entire incident, there were incidences where some of those involved changed their attitudes, some evolving other animosity behaviors. For example, the client who had bogus returns was pissed off when he realized that a new person handled the department in charge of financial entities and was up to his job. When he came back with goods that had no receipts, he expected that things would run his way as always; however, Eric, the assistant manager, turned him away. He suddenly changed his attitude. The manager also changed his behavior by letting Eric handle the case and backing off. 

The behaviors of both the manager and the assistant manager reflect and compares some philosophical theories of decision-making. Eric, the associate manager, acts according to what his conscience feels, reflecting the Deontology theory of decision. According to Cooper (2012), the deontology theory of decision-making entails that people are supposed to adhere to their responsibilities and duties provided that all ethics are in play. On the other hand, the manager also embraced the Utilitarianism philosophical theory of decision-making. He did this through backing-up when Eric realized the bogus customer returns. According to Cooper (2012), the Utilitarianism theory of decision-making states that one makes a decision based on the presumed consequences afterward and protects colleagues and the entire company in general. The manager weighed the situation and preferred to back-off to avoid further financial harm to the retail merchandise (Cooper, 2012). 

There was a case of mishandling the decision-making responsibility when the manager decided to cooperate with the client before the appointment of Eric initially. The manager abused the responsibility to make sound decisions regarding the merchandise; however, he went against responsibility. This ethical case analysis has helped me learn that it is essential to perform one's duties effectively and transparently whenever tasked with the responsibility. Besides, performing duties effectively increase the company's overall success or business entity ( Lokman & Talib, 2016 ). 

References 

Cooper, T. L. (2012). The responsible administrator: An approach to ethics for the administrative role . Associated Faculty Press. 

Lokman, A., & Talib, A. T. (2016). Approaches to Ethics for Public Administrators.  Journal of Administrative Science ,  13 (2).