ITS 360 Ch. 1
What Would You Do?
1. I believe it would be a right thing to bring up to your manager because experience and knowledge are not the only things that would affect being a good worker. If someone has a lot of work experience it could mean that they canít stay at one job for a while. Knowledge you could argue that is gained through a college or university degree. Just because someone has a degree, which most businesses require, doesnít mean they are knowledgeable. This ties in to character. IF someone has a bad character they could have cheated their way through school. That would make their knowledge void. Character is part of hard work as well. Someone could have less knowledge or experience, but their work ethic, part of their character, is way better than another person who has the experience and knowledge. You can be a better worker if you put hard work in rather than having experience and knowledge.
2. I can relate to this personally. At my job the majority of the workers are subpar workers and just do the minimum needed. This is turn affect everyone else who works their and makes their jobs harder along with the managerís. If it was me I would choose not to lie to my employers because my friend is affecting my work as well. Hopefully by my not lying that the managers will recognize and put him on a better path which in turn helps the whole company, even if only by a small amount.
1. I) I accept it partially because it all starts with the type of people you hire. If you hire these new young people who are only interested in making money and being part of an upper class then they are easily influenced by others who say that a certain way is the way to make money and get promoted. If these same people are teaching the new employees this way and it may not be legal then the circle continues. New employees get hired and taught these certain ideals. I also donít agree because there is no way that the engineers in question would be able to make something so drastic to a vehicle that the higher-ups did not know about. I believe there is no way upper management did not know about these changes.
II) They must not allow this continued cutthroat attitude to continue. If it does then nothing will change. These new members must also make sure they are more involved and knowledgeable about the goings on in their facilities and departments. Lastly they need to rework the expectations of new employees.
III) I do not believe that he should be sanctioned. Itís like he said he is not involved in what the people do with his products. If someone makes guns then someone uses those guns to commit a crime is the gun maker liable? The answer would be no. He may have had some part in making the product able to do what it was programmed to do but he has a strong case that it wasnít the intended use.
2. I) I believe that it the investigation should continue up to a point. It should have a set amount of time to be involved in. An issue of this magnitude would have many people throughout the company involved and certainly would be hard to prove the upper level members because there is probably a lot of safeguards they put in to keep themselves clean. The cons of continuing the investigation are that the people who were just following orders from above would also be affected. Also it would remove many workers from the company. The pros would be that you could possibly root out all of the people who think that this was ok.
II) I believe it should continue but it should be vetted better. I believe that people who have no shares in the company should be involved. If someone has shares in the company than they have a vested interest in seeing the company thrive. This would mean they would be more swayed to be involved in things like this.
III) I think companies should involve members from other countries to serve on, or at the very least be involved during board meetings. This will help foreign investors understand what is happening within the company.