In this case, according to the utilitarian approach, Janet would probably choose to not accept the position with Karen's employer. The reason she would not would be because even though it would benefit her immensely it would not provide the greatest benefits and the least harm to the most amount of individuals, in fact the exact opposite would be true.

If, however, Janet were to approach this same scenario from the Kantian point-of-view, she might choose to accept the position with Karen's company, even though it would not provide the greatest benefits for the most people. Immanuel Kant, in the 18th century espoused a philosophy that said that an individual's right to choose for himself was one of the most basic rights of mankind. Kant said that what separated...

Kant said that it is a violation of that dignity to not allow for such individual choices.
So even if Janet were to choose to work with Karen in a vast effort to addict young children to a life-long narcotic, according to Immanuel Kant, she would not and should not be vilified for such a choice since it is what is right for her as an individual.

Freely choosing which pathway she should take does not necessarily make her a righteous person, or an evil person. What her choice does do, is show that (even if unbeknownst to her) she adheres to a certain philosophy of which both Utilitarian and Kantian are only two.