This paper examines an ethical workplace dilemma in which an employee named Tracy listed an incomplete MBA on her resume, despite the degree not being required for her position. Using Badaracco's "right-right" framework, the paper walks through the key questions HR must ask when two legitimate values — honesty and compassion — come into conflict. The analysis considers the consequences of retaining or terminating Tracy, weighing organizational reputation, employee morale, and fairness. The paper concludes with a recommended course of action that balances accountability with humane treatment, reflecting the nuanced decision-making process that the right-right framework is designed to support.
The paper demonstrates framework-driven ethical analysis: rather than jumping to a conclusion, the author poses a sequence of guiding questions derived from the Badaracco model and uses each answer to narrow down the appropriate response. This mirrors the consultative, deliberative approach recommended in applied business ethics literature.
The paper opens by establishing the facts of the case, then moves through the right-right framework question by question — identifying values, examining organizational commitments, and forecasting consequences. Each section builds on the last, culminating in a reasoned recommendation. The use of labeled sub-scenarios (what happens if Tracy stays vs. leaves) adds clarity by making implicit trade-offs explicit.
Lying on a resume is never acceptable to any organization. In the case of Tracy, she lied on her resume by listing an MBA rather than explaining that she had dropped out of the program shortly before completing it. She included the credential even though it was not required for the position she had applied for. The organization discovered the truth not through its own suspicions but through a third party — meaning Tracy had been performing well enough that no one had thought to recheck her credentials. It is also worth noting that Tracy dropped out for family reasons and had been very close to earning the degree.
Now that Human Resources knows Tracy did not complete her MBA and misrepresented this on her resume, the department faces a genuine ethical conflict. Using Badaracco's "right-right" framework, HR must ask itself a series of important questions, the answers to which will determine the best course of action.
The first question the right-right framework requires HR to ask is: what values are at stake in this scenario?
The first important value is honesty. If Tracy is allowed to remain at the firm, other employees may conclude that it is acceptable to lie on a resume because the organization tolerates it. It would also send the wrong message to Tracy herself — she might not fully appreciate the importance of complete honesty when applying for a job, which could create problems for her in the future. Resume fraud carries serious professional and legal risks, and allowing it to go unaddressed can normalize the behavior within an organization.
The second question HR must ask is: what values is the firm truly committed to? Is honesty genuinely important to the organization? Is it critical for the company's reputation that the right message be sent to current and prospective employees?
An important complicating factor here is that HR cannot make a decision in isolation. Terry, who reported the situation, is aware of the full background, and it is entirely possible that he will share the details with others — particularly if Tracy is not let go. The company's reputation is therefore directly at stake. HR must ask itself whether honesty and its preservation are central to the firm's values, and whether company policy addresses misrepresentation on resumes or otherwise signals how important truthfulness is to the organization. Professional HR guidance consistently emphasizes that documented policies on resume verification are essential for handling these situations fairly and consistently.
It is important for HR to consider how the final decision would shape the firm. If Tracy is allowed to stay, what will that say about the firm? If she is let go, what will that say about the firm's values? This question is critical and can serve as a useful lens through which HR can evaluate its options in Tracy's case.
You’re 50% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.