Problem in the Truss Shop Introduction

A truss has snapped during testing and employee has been injured. This is a major setback for the truss company, as it was anticipating getting these trusses to market soon. Now it looks like management is concerned the trusses might not be safe. The sales people are concerned they will lose their commissions if the sales they have booked do not go through. The public is concerned the company is misleading them on the quality of the trusses and the safety of the workplace. One employee already appears to be informing the public about the company’s issues. What should management do? This paper will analyze the issue, consider it from multiple viewpoints and provide an ethical and critical recommendation on how the company should proceed.

Explanation of the Issue

This is a simple problem lying under what appears to be a complex issue. On the surface it appears that chaos is enveloping the truss shop. Employees are unhappy. Managers are worried. Owners are fearful. The public wants to know what is going on. Big promises have been made and now it appears as though the company might be in danger of failing to deliver on those promises. So what is the actual issue?

First of all, it is important to look at the facts of the case. What is known is that one of the new innovative trusses engineered by the company was undergoing a stress test. This is a normal operation that should be done. The purpose of the stress test is to see how much weight the truss can hold before it breaks. Now, while the truss did break during the test, it did not break below the expected threshold. The truss was engineered to hold up to a specific weight and it did just that. When more weight was added the truss broke. Even though some people assumed the truss would support the extra weight, the reality was that the truss did exactly what was expected of it by the engineers. The threshold is the truss’s limit. The stress test proved that.

What is not known is whether that limit is enough to satisfy the company’s commercial customers. Big claims have been made about this new, cheap, innovative truss. It needs to be found out whether the threshold...

If the threshold is not at their needed range, the truss company is looking at a big problem. That is information that still needs to be obtained.
The other issue here is that a worker was injured when the truss broke. Why was the worker injured? Was the worker not practicing good safety precautions? This is the other information that is missing. People are panicking because a worker was injured on the floor, but more information is needed before anyone jumps to a hasty conclusion. The employee who went to the public to tell about what is going on in the company did not do the company justice by rushing off to report first before the company had time to...…then the truss sales can go ahead and the sales people have nothing to worry about.

Secondly, if the injured worker was hurt through his own fault then that is one thing. If, however, the worker was following safety protocol at the time, that is another thing altogether. If the worker was not following protocol, then it has to be determined why he was not. Did he not know? Was he negligent? Was management not paying attention? Who is at fault and what should be done? If protocol was not followed, someone will have to take the blame. Either more training is needed, or better enforcement is needed.

If the worker was following protocol and protocol still failed to protect him that means protocol has to be improved. It is no one’s fault—it is just that protocol has been insufficient in foreseeing possible dangers. That can be addressed through upgrading the protocol.

Finally, there is the problem of the worker scandalizing the public. This worker should be interviewed to see what his motivations were. If he is concerned about the company, he should understand that the company cannot be sold out in this manner. Information has to be considered rightly before allegations are made. The worker must not appear to be a martyr, who was fired for brining important information to the public. If the information was wrong or inappropriately shared, that is something that management can address separately. The worker should not be fired in retaliation, but if there are problems that require the worker to be fired, that is another issue.

References…