Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.
The case study explains how an analyst is facing an ethical issue as he/she is not allowed to disclose the information which is being asked by the vice president of the company. The information can neither be disclosed because it will be highly unethical to do so. The analyst will have to work out a way to be ethical and handle the situation at its best and not offend the vice president of the company.Facts and figuresThe facts stated in the case study states that we have done the interviews and gathered information that is to be remained private. The information of each of the employees are to be remained private, this rule is stated in the company’s consent that has been presented before the results has been computed.
Moreover the company’s vice president has approached to inquire about the results of the research done over the employees of the company.
The stakeholders of the given condition involves the contracted person who will be conducting the study on employees. The other major stakeholder is the person whose information is at stake. There are 50% of the chance that information regarding the person might be leaked out or it is remained private. The vice-president of the company is another stakeholder which can make any kind of use of the information inquired form the analyst.
Idea’s Playing Role in Decision Making
The analyst while analyzing the capacity of the employees is maintaining records of the employees side by side as well. The information about the employees holds great deal about the caliber of each of the employee and how much their level is benefiting the company as well. If the analyst refuses to give the information that would create a problem for him/her as the person asking for the information is none other than vice president of the company. If the analyst provides the vice president with the information that he requires, that would be completely unethical as it will be exploiting the rules of the company stated in the consent. Moreover it will be against the inner values of the analyst as well to give away such information that he/she is not allowed to.
Criteria to be emphasized
The criteria here to be emphasized includes the fact that the analyst must consider that the vice president of the company is approaching him/her. Any answer or action towards the vice president must be carefully handled. Moreover it is important to consider the fact that being unethical here is not the solution as well. Any action taken negatively will be considered the breach of the official consent and is against one’s moral values.
To whom the obligation is owed
The obligation is owed by the analyst in this situation. It is important to understand the fact there are more chances of being unethical in this case than to do just with the employees of the company and with himself/herself as well. The right way in this situation demands the analyst to preserve the rules of the company by obligation and to remain ethical with his/her own moral values.
The obligation in this scenario demands the analyst to be rightful with the employees and not provide their information to the vice president. The main purpose of the study is not to judge the people who are working and compare them rather it is to identify what kind of trainings are required by the employees of the company that will benefit the company in its projects.
Likely consequences for each stakeholders
The analyst must suffer with the consequences of the situation directly whether negative or positive. Analyst will be effected by the situation the most here. This can affect the analyst in future for long term as well. For example if the analyst has decided to refuse to provide information to the vice president directly than he/she might never get another project from this company again. The vice president will also be affected by the decision taken by the analyst directly. The consequences faced by the vice president might be that he never get to know the employee who scored the highest in the analysis of the company. But this effect is for short term.
The employee whose information might end up getting revealed will also be affected by the decision taken. He might not be affected negatively but still be suffering with the consequences in some way.
Actions harming Stakeholders
If Analyst has taken a decision such that it responded the vice-president is offended by it, this type of situation will be harming the analyst and affecting him/her in negative way. The harming in this case is in the form of decisions that will be taken by the vice president as action for the analyst. He/she might not be offered any project from this company later on.The vice president of the company might get harmed from the decision taken by the analyst that he might end up choosing a reaction which will be unethical.
Actions benefiting the stakeholders
The actions taken by the analyst such that the vice president is not offended and he/she doesn’t have to be unethical in any case than such situation can prove out to be beneficial for the analyst. Otherwise the situation can turn against the analyst as well. The benefit that the vice president wants from the situation is that he gets the information of the employees from the analyst. The situation will only benefit the vice president only if the analyst leak out the information desired by him. In any other case the situation will not be favoring the desires of the vice president. If the information is leaked out to the vice president than there are chances that the employee whose information is given to the vice president might get some benefit from the company as well. For example in the form of promotion or rewards or something else.
The analyst will want the situation to be handled in such a way that he doesn’t have to leak out the information to the vice president and he also wouldn’t want the vice president of the company get offended due to his action. The vice president is ignore the official consent of the company and asking for the information so he wants to get hand on the information even if it’s the breach of the company’s official policies. The employees scoring the top score in the analysis will want their information to be leaked out to the voce president as there are chances of getting benefit from the situation as well.
Solution to satisfy stakeholders
There are different methods through which this problem can be tackled. The main solution can be that the analyst refuses the vice president directly referring to the official consent of the company. He can use suitable words to do so that the vice president is not offended by analyst’s action.
Another solution is that the analyst simply provides the information to the vice president because even if the analyst doesn’t provide him with his desired information he will somehow manage to get the information from other resources. The analyst might lose his reputation in the eyes of vice president. This situation will be unethical but it is also one of the solutions as well.
The third solution can be that the analyst buys some time from the president saying he hasn’t completely computed results yet and hands over the information to the vice president later on without the names of the employees which was not necessarily required for the end result. Analyst can explain that he hasn’t used names for the results as stated in the consent of the company. This is a better way to understand the situation by the president as directly hearing a no from the analyst. Vice president should be given greater consideration as we are not to offend him at any cost. We need to make him understand the depth of the situation without being unethical in any case here. Actions showing care for othersIf the analyst doesn’t leak out the information of the employee to the vice president than this shows a great act of the showing cares of others. As the analyst have nothing to do with the situation personally, neither there is any personal interest for him. But still if the analyst does not discriminate with the employees of the company by providing them about the information of the employee who score top in the interview, such act will be representing care for others.
What should be done?
One of the possible solutions discussed earlier can be applied to this situation. The analyst can buy some time from the vice president of the company and ask him that the information will be provided to him in written form. Later on the analyst can provide information in the written form without disclosing the names of the employees and providing the reason that the company’s consent has asked him to do so there is no personal reason from him/her to choose such actions or to offend the vice president. And this situation is better for all the stakeholders regarding one way or other especially for analyst himself/herself.