Conflict of interest refers to a situation that jeopardizes a party’s independence or impartiality by introducing a clash between the professional and personal interests. There is a clear conflict of interest in Joe’s practice. Joe’s relationship with Bill has gone overboard. The reason for that is that the rate of exchange of gifts is too much. For example, the first time they met, Bill offered to purchase an entire case of expensive wine. That would have been better if the gesture was presented after the transaction had been completed. From the case, Joe was able to underbid the contract by five dollars per item. If the management would decide on increasing the bidding price, Joe would find it difficult to make a stand on a decision that would be against Bill. The friendship that has extended to the parties’ families have also aggravated the situation. It is clear that Joe’s relationship with Bill has affected the judgment of Bill in the award of contracts. The main reason for that is that Bill has gone above board to offer successive contracts and referring him to three other friends. The relationship between Joe and Bill is contrary to the laws pertaining to sales, on receipt of gifts.
The gifts exchanged by Joe and Bill are not forms of bribery. The reason is that the hand of kindness extended by Bill has no outcome of favoritism. First, Joe has less to offer in favoritism as compared to what Bill has to offer. Joe has the responsibility of getting contracts from clients. Therefore, if Joe was the one who was responsible for offering gifts then it would have created suspicions of bribery. If it is said that Bill’s gifts are a form of bribery, the next question would be, for what reasons/purposes? Indeed there is nothing much of reasons that would make Bill bribe Joe, as far as the contract is concerned.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Agnihotri & Krush, (2015) examines the ethical salesperson behavior in the development of relationships. One of the key findings of the study is that the effect of salesperson behavior has a positive effect on trust development. Thus, Joe and Bill’s relationship built as a result of a buildup of trust and good relationship as opposed to malicious intentions like bribery (Ferrell et al., 2007).
Despite there being no signs of bribery it goes without saying that the friendship between Bill and Joe would lead to consequences and are build up to the breach of ethics. The theory that would best apply with the actions of the two parties is deontology ( Chakrabarty & Bass, 2015) . This is because, deontology is not much concerned with the consequences of actions in determining rightness or wrongness, but concerned with the principles of actions. Therefore, based on the theory of deontology, the actions of both parties yield to bridge of sales ethics. Another conspicuous and applicable moral ethic is virtue ethics. This type delves with the moral integrity of an individual person. Thus, Joe or Bill could apply this theory to set the boundaries of their practice to be guided by professionalism. Being the top sales representative, it would be obvious that Joe has a full understanding of where the relationship is leading to. Therefore, is a clear indication of negligence and compromise between the two parties.
References
Agnihotri, R., & Krush, M. T. (2015). Salesperson empathy, ethical behaviors, and sales performance: the moderating role of trust in one's manager. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management , 35 (2), 164-174.
Chakrabarty, S., & Bass, A. E. (2015). Comparing virtue, consequentialist, and deontological ethics-based corporate social responsibility: Mitigating microfinance risk in institutional voids. Journal of Business Ethics , 126 (3), 487-512.
Ferrell, O. C., Johnston, M. W., & Ferrell, L. (2007). A framework for personal selling and sales management ethical decision making. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management , 27 (4), 291-299.
