Valerie's Dilemma
The instruction file attached.
"How Personal Can Ethics Get?"
Discuss how personal differences and preference can impact organizational ethics.
An organization is only as 'good' as its people. Vigilant ethical policies in writing are only useful if they are diligently upheld by the organization's leadership. In the case of Valerie's company Wilson Fragrance, this is obvious, as her superior Lionel Waters has engaged in flagrantly unethical policies virtually since his first days at the company. Personal politics rather than true ability dictate promotions and hiring. One of Waters' first actions was to hire close friends as executives with salaries described as well above industry standards and to give himself six weeks of vacation. This sets a lax ethical tone not simply for individuals immediately beneath Waters, but the entire company.
However, clearly dictated policies can at least reduce the chances of such actions affecting others. Because Waters was able to continue his illegitimate actions for so long, it suggests there are no firm guidelines detailing the qualifications for hiring of managers, or for their salaries and vacation days. Of course, there is also little incentive to question such actions amongst lower-level members of the company, given that they fear their jobs can be threatened, and the fact that the organization has become heavily factionalized and polarized contributes to a lack of a sense of a larger mission for the organization.
Since then, Waters' unethical policies have continued and the company has suffered. Wilson Fragrance could clearly benefit from getting the best, lowest-cost fragrances and entering into competitive bidding. But Waters has placed self-enrichment above company needs. Now, the two fragrance companies that Wilson works with exclusively have paid Waters in "commissions and fees" totaling almost $35,000 per month. It is difficult to believe that Wilson does not have an ethical code that prohibits such kickbacks, although its ethical policies might not be specific enough. More importantly, not having careful monitoring and swift enforcement has allowed a culture...
Not only must an ethical policy be clear, but there also must be enforcement mechanisms. In the absence of such, a Waters-like situation can very easily occur and personal interests rather than the interests of the company will prevail.
Q2. Discuss how organizational policies and procedures can impact ethics.
Organizational policies and procedures are often more important than stringent ethical sanctions when promoting an ethical environment. This is clearly manifest in the case of Waters' behavior. While kickbacks are blatantly unethical, Waters seems to know that unless the revelations of his actions are made public, he has little to fear. His powerful position clearly seems to protect him, in his mind. This is an all too common problem at many companies. Although lower-level workers may suffer negative consequences if they violate strict company policy, the higher ups on the organizational 'food chain' are left alone. There are simply fewer people monitoring the ethical actions of the top executives.
However, a lack of ethical oversight has a trickle-down effect. As well as his underhanded actions, Waters has engaged in actions that show disrespect for the company that are quite obvious to underlings as well as to executives and managers. Waters has little sense of a work ethic, for example. He frequently takes vacations, which makes it difficult for him to seem credible when urging others to come in early or to stay late, and to encourage employees to be mindful of their work obligations when personal matters intervene.
Waters engages in many self-aggrandizing actions. Just to show off his horseback riding talent, he rented an entire stable outside of Chicago for one hour and expensed it to the company. Unlike a golfing event, there is no sense of community or 'team building' that is fostered -- no justification can be given for this extravagance. Nor is there any charity component. Although companies may undertake actions that are both for the public good and for self-promotion, like sponsoring public charity events, Waters' actions clearly cross the line into excess for excess' sake. When organizational leaders…
