As one of the departmental managers in the regional offices of an international corporation, one of my most talented and valuable employees informed me that she had accepted a position elsewhere. After overcoming my initial shock, I thought of the approaches available for such a scenario; making a counteroffer or attempt to persuade her to stay. Put succinctly, this situation entailed me and the then soon to be ex-employee. To reveal her level of determination about the move I decided to implement both approaches to dissuade her from resigning.
While it was only myself and the employee who were directly involved in this situation, undoubtedly, the impact of my attempts and her determination would influence not only my department but also her future employers. Therefore, the resolution of the dilemma would impact not only the employee, but it would also affect the remaining colleagues both at the individual and departmental levels. Furthermore, as the head of the department, the final decision was mine to make. That said, I was able to hold consultative meetings with officers from both human resources and finance to get a better understanding of the resources that could be committed to ensuring that I would be able to make promises that I was able to keep. Otherwise, I would be exposing both the employee and myself to the demoralizing effects of making promises that could eventually be proven untrue.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Armed with information necessary to implement either approach, I scheduled a private meeting with the employee. Therein, I made her aware that my initial intention was to try to make her a counteroffer or persuade her to stay as a means of testing her determination. After realizing that people change both professional and personal goals over time, I decided not to implement either approach. Instead, I acknowledged and praised her contribution to the organization. Thereafter, I inquired if she was able to continue her stay to train her replacement and for a final status report on her unfinished projects. Furthermore, I was able to participate in her exit interview with the aim of discovering if her reason for leaving was something within my control such as opportunities for career advancement. To maintain a professional connection, I asked for her new contact information.
To my mind, the decision not to make attempts to keep her in the company was ethical because of the realization that goals, both personal and professional, evolve. Despite the implied difficulty of losing a talented and valued staff member, supporting her decision to resign was the best outcome for the concerned parties. Further, the conduct of the exit interview was meant to draw insight that would mitigate against similar future events.
Act utilitarianism relates to the consequences of an act such that if the greatest number benefit from it, then the act was right (Parboteeah & Cullen, 2013). Accepting her resignation is the act that brought benefits to most of the concerned parties. She was able to develop her career with an employer of her choice and it eliminated any backlash that would have accompanied me persuading her to stay. Conversely, the Kantian approach focuses more on action than consequences (Parboteeah & Cullen, 2013). If either her personal or professional goals had evolved to the point of requiring another employer, then the best approach would be to accept her resignation. Seemingly, under both approaches, accepting her resignation is the best alternative.
Reference
Parboteeah, P., K & Cullen, B. J. (2013). Business Ethics . Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
