Ethical Dilemmas in Business Case One: This

Ethical Dilemmas in Business Case One: This is a situation where a disgruntled worker from the company's main competitor mailed top-secret information or innovative product samples to me. Some of the major concerns that arise include whether to forward the information to the firm's research department or to mail the information back to the competitor informing them what is happening. The other ethical dilemmas that arise include whether to ignore or throw the secrets away and whether to notify the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).

While this situation is more of an ethical situation, it's also a legal concern because of the legal aspects that arise when choosing the most suitable course of action and the legal implications. From a legal perspective, this situation is covered by Uniform Trade Secrets Act, which contains various provisions on misappropriation and gathering information through improper means. According to the Act, misappropriation is obtaining trade secrets of a company's competitor or another business through a person who acquired it by improper means (Whipple par, 2).

On the other hand acquiring information through improper means include bribery, theft, violation of a duty to maintain secrecy, misrepresentation, and espionage via electronic and other channels. The Uniform Trade Secrets Act also contains provisions that explain the implications for misappropriation including monetary damages, injunction, and likely penal damages. The use of this information by the company would be considered as misappropriation since the disgruntled employee was violating his/her duty to maintain secrecy.

From an ethical perspective, the top-secret information was not obtained in moral manner because it wasn't from a free and honest source. Since the information was acquired from a source with wrong motives and intentions, it's considered as dishonest information. As information obtained dishonestly, the company's ability for using this information is compromised and may result in legal consequences. Therefore, the manager should not forward the top-secret information to the company's research department for use within the firm.

Furthermore, since the information is considered as top-secret rather than classified information, calling the FBI would not be a suitable course of action because this governmental agency mainly deals with the disclosure of classified information. Efforts to ignore or throw the information away may make it difficult for the manager to prove that he/she didn't use the information if it's later discovered independently by the company.

As previously mentioned, calling the FBI, forwarding the information to the research team, and ignoring or throwing the secrets away are not the best possible courses of action because they are inappropriate for the involved stakeholders and the company's future. The most suitable course of action is to mail the information back to the competitor and make no use of it. This is largely because of the need for the company to conduct itself in an ethical manner and the legal implications of other options.

Companies can only use disclosed information about its competitor if it's not subject to confidentiality limitations or regarded as a trade secret (Millien par, 6). Case Two: This is a situation where the regional chemical company should make a decision on whether to install a scrubber system that will remove pollutants and ash that emanate from its production of bulk chemicals. The situation arises after various groups in the company's neighborhood have been complaining of minor health problems that are caused by the smoke emitted through the firm's smoke stack.

As the general manager of this chemical firm, the situation raises a huge ethical dilemma because of the complaints, huge cost of installing the scrubber system, and the fact that the company does not violate EPA regulations. From a legal viewpoint, one of the major considerations in determining the best course of action would be on whether the levels of smoke emitted through the company's smokestack violate the existing EPA regulations.

Based on the details of this case, these levels of pollutants emitted into the atmosphere are below the current regulations of Environmental Protection Agency thus not violating any laws. One of the courses of action that the company may consider is ignoring the complaints from the neighborhood groups since its acting within the law. However, the company is likely to suffer from minor legal implications if these groups sue it for ignoring their complaints and prove that their health problems are caused by the smoke.

From an ethical viewpoint, the company needs to consider being a socially and environmentally responsible firm in determining its course of action. By choosing to ignore these complaints, the company will have ignored a major stakeholder to its success i.e. The community and will not be considered as an environmental responsible company. However, the major challenge in the company's quest to implement the scrubber system and respond effectively to these complaints is the huge costs associated with the system. The most.