Ethical Decision Making in Difficult Situations

Question 1

Daniel Terris was responsible for giving a fascinating analysis of the morals program that was geared towards the protection of temporary workers in the business. In 1996, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Norman Augustine initiated a system that would rely on the prepackaged game (Terris, 2013). The system would utilize characters from the Dilbert cartoon line that had been presented. However, Augustine gave an interesting facet concerning ethical tenets in the operation of the system. He asserts that putting obligations on each specialist depending on their activities might jeopardize the moral obligations hence creating ethical complexities that might make decision making difficult. It is critical to note that both the individuals affected and the organizations have obligations to people despite the fact that other entities are likely to be appreciated for their role in the success of the company. The leaders in the company are great believers in the period of industrial development. Therefore, they created an environment that was not only conducive to the advancement of the employees but also their individual character. The leaders also were responsible for advocating for an arrangement which promoted fair business transactions. The result of this intervention led to the development of the Lockheed Martin ethics programs that was vital in enhancing ethical practices in the organization.

Question 2

Any business must face competition in its jurisdiction of operations. In some instances, the competition can be unfair. Any business that wishes to succeed in the corporate world must work hard to outperform the other through competition. Some businesses will play a clean game and follow the tenets of fair play and rules in the bid to oust their counterparts in the market. Equally, other organizations engage in unfair practices with the aim of outperforming other business. This particular type of competition is referred to as the leg up to competition. Businesses that use unfair means to wage of competition in most cases take advantage of the consumers so that they can reap up the maximum benefits. In some other cases, companies engage in unlawful practices such as bribery where officials offer undue advantages to other overseas companies to secure sales. If in any case, all the business engages in the unethical practice of offering bribes to the overseas company, then the method of competition can be regarded as fair. Terry poses a question regarding who gets hurt with the prospect of using bribes to secure the aircraft sales. It is an obvious answer that in this case, it is the competitors who face the wrath of the practice but if everybody engages in the bribery practice (same rules), then it can no longer be argued that it is unethical activity.

In a situation where underhand methods are the order of the day in carrying out business, it means that everybody is playing on the same level ground. The question that therefore arises from this situation is it unethical to compete under such conditions? In answering this question, it is important to look at the fairness involved in the practice. Every business is using the same tactics in capturing the market, but the only discrepancy in the methods is that they are all illegal. The mere fact that all the businesses are engaged in the shady deals is enough proof that the competition should be regarded as ethical. However, if a business owner feels that the use of underhand or shady deals gives the opponent an undue advantage of over the others, then they should withdraw from such a practice because they are unethical in the first place. But if a business decides to go on with the competition that is based on illegalities, the playing field becomes level and therefore blocking any ethical considerations.

Question 3

The Defense Industry Initiative (DII) was crucial to the success of the Lockheed Martin's especially in the area of the ethical program. This was partly due to the fact that the defense industry had an uneasy and lengthy reputation of engaging in various sorts of bribery that tarnished the name and the image of the company. The Lockheed Martin company was engaged in paying off huge amounts of bribes which led to their subsequent investigation with an agency referred to as the ‘'Foreign Corrupt Practices Act'' in the US (Terris, 2013). The DII principals were important in a number of ways that helped in returning the reputation of the company. First, it played a crucial role in providing better management practices that would ensure that the business adhered to the tenets of regulations and also regaining the trust of the public which had severely been damaged to the unethical business practices that faced the company. A position was created in the company known as the DII coordinator whose role was very critical in ensuring that the company was heading back to normal ethical practice. The coordinator had the role of assembling efficient practices, monitoring people, organizing tasks and rallies, keeping up with data, and conducting other business that was in tandem with the provisions of the DII codes of operations.

The employees in the company benefited immensely from this particular initiative as it ensured that they implemented the ethical program that defined operations in the company. It was also important for curbing unethical business practices that the company was previously known for including bribery among other practices that work to create a playing ground that is not level. Another importance that was critical to the survivability of the company was the fact that the DII program enhanced public confidence back to the company. 

Question 4

Norman was critical in the Lockheed Martin success concerning the ethical consideration in a number of ways. Norman was the CEO of Martin Marietta, a big competitor of the Lockheed Company. He was getting along well with another CEO of Lockheed who went by the name Daniel Tellep. Because Norman had successfully run his company which strictly adhered to the ethical principles, it acted as a positive influence on the Lockheed organization which borrowed a leaf from its competitor, Martin Marietta which was under the stewardship of Norman. Therefore, it is crucial to note that Norman acted as the motivator to Daniel Tellep, who in turn enabled the ethics programs to be implemented in the company. Norman made an agreement that played a role in reducing the company’s ability to operate without following the ethical guidelines. He also contributed in making certain recommendations and standards that were used in the ethical program of Lockheed Company.

He role played by Dilbert in the success of the organization cannot be overemphasized. He played a number of key roles in ensuring that the ethical programs of the organization were followed to the latter (Terris, 2013). Dilbert’s company was instrumental in assisting the company to make applications of the ethical program. The Dilbert’s company developed comic-strip characters that positively impacted on the workers of the Lockheed Company and the business to a larger extent. Therefore, it also important to appreciate the level of help that was offered by the two personalities in developing workmanship and influencing the development of the ethical programs. 

Reference

Terris, Daniel. (2013). Ethics at Work, Waltham, US: Brandeis, ProQuest ebraby. Web. 6 June 2016.