BMGT 496 - The business ethics assignment

Use the following format with headings: Create a title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name and date; Introduction Ethical Dilemma; Explain the decision George should make. Students are required to apply at least two
theories to explain the decision that George should make. Compare and Contrast of Results Using Two Theories; Look for the ethical dilemma, which can be identified as a dilemma that focuses on
matters of principle. An ethical dilemma can be seen when two principles are in conflict.
Present the ethical dilemma as an either/or decision or as two or more alternatives The Decision; Create the introductory paragraph. Within this paragraph, provide a brief overview of
the scenario. Then, provide a thesis statement and tell the reader the main topics
covered in the paper. The introduction comes at the beginning of the paper and tells a
reader the main topics covered in the paper Create a table with two columns. In the first column, identify the similarities of the two
theories. In the second column, identify the differences of the two theories. Discuss
each of the similarities identified in the first column. Discuss each of the differences
identified in the second column. Resolution of Dilemma Select the result that provides the best resolution of the ethical dilemma and explain
why CASE STUDY: George Cosgrove is the Senior Vice President (SVP) for Quality Control at All-in-One
Pharmaceutical, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the Company), a multi-million-dollar
medical supply manufacturer and distributor with offices in several states.
George has been with the Company for 25 years in a variety of positions but his current
position, which he has held for the last 5 years, is by far his plum assignment and
position with the Company.
George oversees all testing of products, putting to good use his advanced degree in
supply chain management, with a concentration in healthcare. He is known throughout
the Company, as the “go to” person on any of the Company’s numerous products.
As SVP, George is one of the final Company officials to approve the launch of any its
products on the market. One of the Company’s signature products is a device called “Shot-o-Vac,” a
revolutionary device depended upon by many consumers for the emergency treatment
of allergic reactions.
The Company spent millions of dollars developing the product and the U.S. Patent
Office recently extended its intellectual property rights in the product for another 5
years, which virtually guarantees that the Company will have no competition in the
manufacture and distribution of this product during the extension period.
Excited and pleased over the government’s action extending the Company’s intellectual
property rights, the CEO, Perry Periwinkle, called George into his office to give him the
great news.
Given George’s prominence in the company and his work developing the Shot-o-Vac,
the CEO wanted to share a toast to the great news. George was ecstatic over the news
and appreciative of the CEO’s acknowledgement of his efforts. During their
conversation, the CEO told George that the extension of the intellectual property rights
not only meant long-term stability for the Company, but also meant the green light for
the CEO’s plan to double the price of the device. George was taken aback by this
news, as he had always believed the price was correctly set and provided a good profit
margin for the Company.
Seeing the concerned look on George’s face, the CEO patted him on the back and said
“George-- in this business one has to strike while the iron is hot, and this will increase
everyone’s compensation. I know this is important to you because you have three kids
in college.”
Having been present at the meetings with the government discussing the extension of
the intellectual property rights, George recalled the CEO’s representations that the
Company did not foresee any significant increases in the price of the device in the near
term, and that any increases would be commensurate with any increases in the
Company’s costs associated with the manufacture of the device. When George
reminded the CEO of these representations, the CEO noted that they were not legally
binding and were just gamesmanship. Whether the representations were legally binding
or not, George could not put out of his mind his belief that they played a part in the US
Patent Office’s decision.
While the CEO is anxious to roll out the newly priced device, he values George’s advice
and the concerned look on George’s face did not go unnoticed. The CEO’s last words
to George were "if you have any reservations at all, you need to let me know." George,
with many thoughts racing through his mind, including his internal pledge to himself that
he would always be an instrument for good, assured the CEO that he would give him
his best counsel and left the office to think about what he should do.
REFERENCES:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-business/ http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Values-and-culture-inethical-decision-making.aspx
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/ethterm.htm
http://www.cio.com/article/2446373/careers-staffing/making-the-best--right--decision.html
https://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/01/do-the-right-thing-making-ethical-decisions-ineveryday-life/?_r=1
https://www.academia.edu/5837011/The_Role_of_Moral_Values_in_Instigating_Morally_Respo
nsible_Behavior
http://www.fmlink.com/article.cgi?
type=How+To&title=The+Importance+of+Ethics+in+the+Workplace&pub=BOMI+International
&id=46054&mode=source
http://work.chron.com/employee-behavior-standards-workplace-8745.html