Amber

Individual Scenario 1

Individual Scenario Paper

University of Phoenix: MBA 500

Individual Scenario 2

Abstract

A young PHD graduate from MIT was hired by Mr. Polston to support the Graphics and Clinical testing software for one of the most profitable departments within the company. This employee refused to support a specific software package that was needed to support this highly important division. His reasoning was due to the fact that he believed this software to be developed by students from MIT using grant money from the University and believed that the students were not returning any of the gained profits back to MIT, and he viewed this to be unethical. This division’s president immediately contacted the CEO of Mr. Polston’s company, Mr. Polston’s boss, who was furious and immediately told Mr. Polston to fire the employee. The CEO had spent a great deal of resources installing a customer sensitive culture into this organization, and this new PHD graduate clearly was going against this organization’s philosophy. Mr. Polston needed to use a critical thinking analysis in order to be fair to the customer, the employee, and the CEO.

Individual Scenario 3

The ultimate problem is figuring out which party is ethically correct here: the software company or the new employee. This includes setting up a framework for what is and is not ethical. This situation has come about due to an upset customer lacking the needed support for a particular software package. The employee refusing to give the support is arguing unethical behavior on the part of the software company for profiting from a software development that was originally conceived due to a MIT funded grant. MIT, according to the employee’s beliefs, is not receiving any funding back for their investment. The CEO has issued a directive to terminate the responsible employee for defying the goals of the organization. One problem created three issues: disgruntled customer, unhappy employee, and Mr. Polston’s need to take action.

The end state goals would be to suffice the customer, make the employee happy, and put Mr. Polston in a situation where he is able to smooth things over so he would not have to fire the employee but at the same time respect the wishes of his CEO. Additionally, regardless of how this situation turns out, a process should be put into place to avoid future situations similar to this arising.

There are several alternatives to consider before acting upon this situation. The first alternative could be to follow the orders of the CEO, which would translate into firing the employee and continuing with the support of the software created by the MIT students. The second alternative is to respect the decision of the CEO however investigate the allegations of the employee and act from there. The third alternative would be to go back to the CEO with the allegations stated by the employee and explain to the CEO why the division should not support the software.

Individual Scenario 4

Evaluating the alternatives is necessary in order to decide upon which to act. The first scenario would be to take the orders of the CEO and fire the employee. This would mean that the division would suffice the customer and the software would be supported. This could also affect the employee’s view of the organization as he could be dissatisfied with the company. Mr. Polston could be upset with the fact that he hired an employee who, for whatever reason, did not follow his job duties. Mr. Polston’s seniors could also have negative feelings toward his actions and question whether he made a good decision in hiring this new graduate from MIT.

With the second scenario, Mr. Polston can still acknowledge the CEO’s orders and respect them, but at the same time put faith into the new hire and investigate the allegations that he stated. There would be additional alternatives if this decision were made. If the MIT students were in fact being ethical, show this information to the employee, and support the software. If employee still didn’t agree and refused to support the software, Mr. Polston could fire him. If the employee did agree, Mr. Polston could teach the employee a valuable career lesson to gather all facts before affecting vital customer relations within the division. Possibly he could receive a written warning or some type of consequence. If the CEO forced Mr. Polston to fire him, then Mr. Polston would have to take that action. On the other hand, if the MIT students were being unethical, Mr. Polston could explain the situation to the CEO, and consequently support the employee. The benefit here is that the information gathering would take place in order to make a more informed decision.

Individual Scenario 5

The third alternative entailed trusting in the employee and explaining to the CEO that the software being sold is being done so in an unethical manner and that the division should not support the software and thus support their new hire in his decision.

The next pertinent step is identifying and assessing the risks involved with the previous alternatives. There would be several risks involved with following the orders of the CEO and firing the employee, which was stated in the first alternative. Among them could be a backlash of retaliation from the employee if indeed the division were supporting students’ unethical behavior. Mr. Polston could receive more negative ramifications on reviews and ill feelings due to the fact that he hired an employee that would do such a thing, regardless of the ethical nature of the employee’s decision. This scenario would also pose a risk because the truth behind whether or not the students were ethical and/or the employee would be open to interpretation and opinion since it were never researched. The other risk involved is increased cost for firing and replacing the employee at that position as well as lost productivity and training resources.

The second alternative included Mr. Polston not obeying direct orders from his boss, the CEO. He would be going around his CEO’s