16 September 2016
What Would You Do?
Use the five-step decision-making process discussed in the chapter to analyze the following
situations and recommend a course of action.
1. You are a recent new hire at your company and have been given the responsibility for
soliciting the employees in your 10-person department for the company’s annual drive to
support United Way (a national nonprofit organization that works with a coalition of
volunteers, contributors, and local charities to help people in their own communities).
Your company sets “giving goals” based on each employee’s annual salary. You have
completed your initial solicitation of your coworkers, and several of them declined to
contribute, while others have pledged amounts well under their “giving goal.” As a result, your department is a few thousand dollars short of its goal. You have a meeting this afternoon with the senior vice president responsible for the company’s United Way program. You are concerned that you may be pressured to resolicit and encourage under contributors to pledge more. Do you think that this is a fair request? How would you respond if such pressure is applied to you?
Well, it’s obviously a donation and they are goals. None of that is a requirement but rather a matter of personal thought and contribution. I personally do not think it’s a fair request but it would only become unethical if the employees were forced to donate the money. The “right” thing to do is to donate, but like I mentioned above, it would be unethical to force donations. Then it is an extortion.
2. You are currently being considered for a major promotion within your company to vice
president of marketing. In your current position as manager of advertising, you supervise
15 managers and 10 hourly workers. As part of the annual salary review process, you
have been given the flexibility to grant your employees an average 3 percent annual sal-
ary increase; however, you are strongly considering a lower amount. This would ensure
that your department’s expenses stay under budget and would send the message that
you are able to control costs. How would you proceed?
Well, it would be unethical to twist this based on personal gain and image. I would think that in this case it is my responsibility, after the raised are administered, to control the costs thereafter.
1. Present three strong arguments that IBM might have used to justify the start of its sustainability programs in the 1970s.
A better public image, to receive minimal scrutiny, and to feel socially responsible.
2. What major goals has IBM achieved in environmental stewardship?
Reducing emissions, reliance on toxic chemicals, and reducing electronic waste.
3. How might IBM leverage its leadership in sustainability to maintain its competitiveness in the IT market?
By continuing to be socially responsible and continue their diligence for a cleaner and safer earth. Using their budgets for advanced research.
1. Discuss how a CIO might handle Schrage’s scenarios using the suggested process for ethical decision making presented in this chapter.
Basically, Schrage’s suggestions are wrong and unethical. Doing the right thing is always the answer.
2. Discuss the possible short-term losses and long-term gains in implementing ethical solutions for each of Schrage’s scenarios.
Short term losses would include employees becoming disgruntled early when informing that they will be laid off. This may create some work ethic decline. The long term gains, however, would be the employees and the public respecting that he informed before laying the employees off.
3. Must businesses choose between good ethics and financial benefits? Explain your answer using Schrage’s scenarios as examples.
When it comes down to it, yes, these decisions unfortunately have to be made. Although, I would hope that good ethics are always in place but there is definitely corporate greed.
4. What do you think Schrage means when he says that CIOs “should stop trying to do the ‘right thing’ when implementing IT and focus instead on getting their implementations right”? Do you agree?
I do not agree, because companies, as well as individuals, should always have integrity. Doing the right thing, even when no one is looking. This helps create a free and clear conscience.