OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT DILEMMA

Applying Christian Principles to an Operations Management Dilemma

From the onset, it would be prudent to note that the ethical dilemma I opted to focus on in this write-up relates to managing quality (chapter 6). Heizer, Render and Munson (2020) point out that one of the most crucial tasks for operations managers happens to be ensuring that the products as well as services delivered to customers are not only safe and healthy, but also of good quality. Poor quality products and services have the potential to harm the health and wellbeing of customers. They could also end up ruining the reputation of companies and/or result in lawsuits. What, therefore, should a company do if there is reason to believe that a product introduced in the market is faulty and could end up harming customers? Whereas a recall could potentially harm the image of the company and have a negative financial impact, failure to act could result in injuries on the part of customers who purchase the faulty or defective product. Heizer, Render and Munson (2020) are categorical that if a firm believes that it has introduced a questionable product, ethical conduct must dictate the responsible action (219). This write-up explores how this ethical dilemma could be addressed from a Christian worldview.

To begin with, the Bible, in Proverbs 10:9, makes an observation to the effect that persons who are dishonest and embrace crooked courses of action are often found out. However, those who make a deliberate decision to ensure integrity in all their actions are guaranteed to walk securely. More specifically, whoever walks in integrity walks securely, but whoever takes crooked paths will be found out (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Proverbs 10: 9). Walking in integrity would in the present scenario entail recalling the product and issuing a public apology. The Bible is categorical that if a crooked course of action (i.e. conspiring to hide the truth about the defective items) is embraced, then this contravention or violation will definitely be found out at some point in the future. The repercussions of this would be dire, i.e. with regard to loss of customer trust, institution of lawsuits that could end up bankrupting the company, etc. On the other hand, if the company recalls the product, it would effectively be safeguarding its legacy and further cementing its position as a legitimate business enterprise going forward. This would likely favor the business in as far as financial performance and stability is concerned i.e. as indicated in the verse, whoever walks in integrity walks securely... (English Standard Version Bible, 2001, Proverbs 10:9).

The Bible also offers guidance to top officers of the company on how to resolve the ethical dilemma identified. One of the most important biblical concepts that Jesus spoke about relates to treating other persons in the same way you would want to be treated. More specifically, in Mathew 7:12, it has been stated, so whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets (English Standard Version Bible, 2001). Thus, the all-important question that the top managers of the company should ask themselves is: would I want to be sold defective products if I was on the other end as a customer? In as much as they are manufacturers/producers in the current context, managers of this particular company happen to be consumers in other contexts. If they would not want to buy and potentially be harmed, or have their loved ones harmed, by a defective product, then they should take all the measures necessary to ensure that others are protected from such harm. In the present scenario, this would largely entail recalling the product in question. It should be noted that this rule of conduct, as captured in Mathew 7:12, is often referred as the Golden Rule, and as Anderson (2009)...…will produce the greatest good for the greatest number (98). In the ethical dilemma presented in this write-up, the best course of action would be the institution of a recall of the defective product from the market as this is the course of action that would produce the greatest good for the greatest number of persons. The greatest number could in this case be thought of in terms of who the stakeholders of the company are and which stakeholder category would be impacted (negatively and positively) by failure to act. Key stakeholders could in this case comprise of; customers, employees, shareholders, and suppliers. In this case, all stakeholder categories would be negatively impacted by failure to recall the product. Customers would be impacted in the short-run in terms of being harmed by the product. The interests of employees and shareholders would be harmed in the long-term as the company is likely to attract bad publicity and lawsuits that would likely bankrupt it. Suppliers would be harmed in terms of loss of business if the company ceases to exist. Thus, the most good would in this case be done by recalling the defective product.

In the final analysis, it would be prudent to note that if the company acts in a responsible manner, i.e. in as far as handling this particular ethical dilemma is concerned (i.e. via recall, issuance of a public apology, and compensation of those harmed), Christian customers would be expected - or at the very least called upon - to forgive the transgression. This is in line with the message of Luke 17:3 which states: pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him (English Standard Version Bible, 2001). This is an attestation to the fact that Christian principles could be deployed in diverse scenarios to promote our unity with God and with our fellow humankind. They should, thus, be embraced by all those seeking…