It is like a double-edged sword, one must understand the pros and cons to every option. Yes with option one, it appears that by having the bank take over that this offers the best case scenario for everyone but Joe must weigh the possible repercussions and how they will affect business. In other words, this may be saving everyone's job and the company but at what cost to quality of the job and the company? This bank intervention may not be worth the hassle if the culture of the company changes for the negative. This can have a direct influence on productivity and morale. Joe needs to keep all the details in mind before deciding. Question 4: What pressures does Joe face regarding honesty and telling the truth about his situation?

In this situation, Joe faces many pressures as most business owners would when faced with such challenges. He has to decide whether or not to take the safe way out or take a chance and see if he can save this venture for not only himself but also the staff. It is really a matter of knowing what kind of risks one is willing to take but also having the integrity and honesty to face the consequences of the situation's outcome. He knew the chances when he took on this venture but this does not change the fact that right now, his leadership skills are crucial to so many futures with no guarantee of success. Still he will be able to better face these challenges if he acts from a place of honesty and grace. The worst thing he can do at this point is to be dishonest with himself about the situation. Still each option must be weighed for attributes of risk and challenge separately in order to make the best decision for himself and the others. Each option creates different pressures not including just the pressure of analyzing the options. Actually one would think any businessperson would be constantly weighing risk along side with the details of each choice. It depends on the person if one is more conservative or liberal, how much one is willing to commit but also one must factor in the weight of...

The pressures of each option are examined in the paragraph below for Joe's point-of-view. In general each option presents different challenges and therefore the pressure of making the best possible solution.
For option one, Joe faces the pressure of knowing if allowing the bank to intervene is the best solution. He faces the pressure of how this solution will not only change his role in the company but how others will perceive this action. He faces the pressure of not knowing if the bank can be trusted to carry on his leadership and allow for open communication. There is the concern that the staff will not buy in to the idea and this could lead to people leaving. Option three was not chosen a solution because it represents dishonest business practices. Still if Joe were to choose this option, he would be living a dishonest life and creating a path of lies which he has to be accountable for eventually. He will have to live with the pressure of knowing he acted this way for the sake of himself and profit. It is my belief that this option creates the most problems for Joe because of lies. It creates a place where people are constantly questioning leadership. Option two also puts Joe under a large amount of pressure and in many ways the most out of the two viable options because it requires him to be the most ethical. This option requires the greatest amount of discomfort for Joe as he opens the lines of communication and honesty. Still this is the chance he takes knowing that being putting all the facts on the table, he is creating a culture that values honesty, integrity and hard work. By disclosing these facts, he also commits himself to seeing the company through this difficult time. This definitely displays his strong leadership skills and the trueness of his character.

Work Cited:

Leadership Ethics? I did not have the information about the chapter. Citation style below.

Last name, first name. Book title. City of Publisher: Publisher name, year of publication.