rgs

sandesh121

Ethics-CaseStudies1.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Accounting homework help >rgs

THE BASIS FOR ETHICAL CONDUCT

An Introduction to The Ethical Conduct Paradigm

ETHICS FOR DECISION-MAKING CASE STUDIES

Douglas W. Warner

Table of Contents

THE BASIS FOR ETHICAL CONDUCT Introduction ...........................................................................1 The Ethical Conduct Paradigm .............................................3 Values and Beliefs .................................................................5 The Structure of Values and Beliefs ................................7 Primary and Secondary Values and Beliefs ....................8 Wants and Needs ................................................................. 11 Relationships .......................................................................13 Group Relationships ............................................................15 Intelligence ..........................................................................17 Discipline ............................................................................19 Concluding Remarks ...........................................................21 Primary Definitions .............................................................23

ETHICS FOR DECISION-MAKING CASE STUDIES ................................................................25 The Calf-Path ......................................................................27 Case #1: Sinko Corp., A Nepotism Problem .......................29 Case #2: The Stanford Prison Study ...................................32 Case #3: To My Family, My Physician, My Lawyer and All Others Whom It May Concern .........................34 Case #4: Justice ...................................................................35 Case #5: The Prosecuting Attorney .....................................36 Case #6: Electro Industries .................................................37 Case #7: Campbell Soup Company ....................................41 Case #8: Diamond Find, Inc. ..............................................44 Case #9: Melinda’s Dilemma ..............................................45 Case #10: Ace Brick Company ...........................................46 Case #11: Who Shall Live? .................................................48 Case #12: Illegal Behavior ..................................................49 Case #13: Clones .................................................................50 Case #14: The Old Bait and Switch Game .........................52 Case #15: The Island of “Kora” ..........................................53

The Basis For Ethical Conduct

An Introduction to The Ethical Conduct Paradigm

Fifth Edition

Dr. Douglas W. Warner Amberton University

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmit- ted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including pho- tocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing.

First Edition - 1984

Second Edition - 1988

Third Edition - 1992

Fourth Edition - 1996

Fifth Edition - 2002

THE BASIS FOR ETHICAL CONDUCT

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE ETHICAL CONDUCT PARADIGM

Introduction: In recent years many words have been spoken and penned to explain, clarify, and exhort the concept of “ethics.” Business ethics, biomedical ethics, financial ethics, personal ethics, political ethics, group ethics, family ethics, etc. have all been discussed by philosophers, theologians, educators, and politicians. It seems that everyone and every group are wrestling with the topic or the concept of ethics in an effort to clarify what is right or wrong, good or bad. While most of the current ethical studies have resulted in little more than cosmetic platitudes, such efforts should not be considered without merit. After all, striving toward greater understanding of ethical perceptions is one of the noblest acts of humanity, and it may very well separate man from the ani- mals. Indeed, a search for ethical understanding is tantamount to a striving for a betterment of oneself. Most writings of recent vintage address the topic of ethics from a comparative or definitive approach. An indi- vidual is given a case example of an ethical situation and then asked to render a judgment. Usually, the judgment is to be based upon an ethical rule that has been pre-defined. The technique, it is presumed, will assist the individual in becom- ing more ethical by allowing the person to become aware of the theoretical applications that apply. Thus, most ethical studies stress the issue of ethics by exhorting one to weigh the merits of each act, or to weigh the consequences of the act, to determine the proper action to be taken. In theory, the process of studying ethical cases in an effort to make a person more ethical has merit. However, the concept fails the acid test, practicality. In truth, most ethical decisions are made while the individual is under the influence of emotion. Perhaps the purely logical person could be prag- matic and ponder his ethical decisions carefully prior to taking

action, but, for most of us, the ethical decisions that we make are often tainted with the emotions of the moment. Too often, when making ethical decisions, man’s logical nature is influ- enced by a philosophy that is best summarized by the lines of a song that states, “I don’t care what’s right or wrong, just help me make it through the night…” No one approaches the topic of ethics as a blank slate ready to be filled with values and beliefs derived from logical discourse. Indeed, each approaches the discussion of ethics with an extensive, preconceived view of what is good or bad, right or wrong, and one is often more inclined to protect his position than to critically analyze his conviction. Before one can attempt to modify or change his ethi- cal decision-making method, he must understand his present ethical model―how he presently makes ethical decisions. In essence, what is needed is an ethical review, a revealing of one’s present ethical views and what factors influence ethical decision making. To better understand the basis of one’s ethics and how ethical decisions are made, the Ethical Conduct Paradigm is presented. As author of the Ethical Conduct Paradigm, I acknowledge at the outset of the presentation that the par- adigm is neither complete nor final. It, like most theories, should be used only as a point of departure, a view for discus- sion.

THE ETHICAL CONDUCT PARADIGM

The Ethical Conduct Paradigm (ECP) is not confined to a simple discussion of ethics. The ECP is a matrix of five mind filters that are brought to bear in differing proportions or influences each time an individual is confronted with an ethical decision. Let me repeat, the Ethical Conduct Para- digm is not just an explanation of ethics, it is a framework that discusses the process of how ethical decisions are actually derived. To begin the discussion of the paradigm, three terms or concepts should be defined: (1) ethics, (2) one’s ethics, and (3) one’s ethical conduct. Ethics is the study of the general nature of goodness or badness as it relates to specific choices made by an individual in his relationship to self and/or others. One’s ethics is a body of moral standards that influ- ences behavior or choices made, or to be made, by an indi- vidual in dealing with self or others. One’s ethical conduct is derived from a complex mind system that influences behavior or choices made, or to be made, by an individual in dealing with self or others. Note that the definitions are closely related, but there is a significant difference between the last two. Ethical conduct is derived from a complex mind system. The complex mind system includes one’s moral standards, but it also includes much more. It is the “much more” that is the basis for the Ethical Conduct Paradigm. An expanded discussion of the variables―I will call them filters―that comprise the complex mind system relative to the Ethical Conduct Paradigm will enable the individual to better understand his/her own ethical decision-making modus operandi and predict the ethical con- duct of others. The complex mind system that comprises one’s basis for ethical decision making is composed of five filters: (1) values and beliefs, (2) wants and needs, (3) relationships, (4) intelligence, and (5) discipline.

VALUES AND BELIEFS

The first filter that comprises the paradigm is identified as “values and beliefs.” Prior to discussing this filter, it must be conceded that many scholars will disagree with combin- ing these two terms―values and beliefs. They, and rightfully so, will argue that these two words differ in connotation, if not denotation, relative to their sociological meanings. I con- cede that the meanings of these two words can be debated, and I will, therefore, give a specialized definition that will hold exclusively for the paradigm. Thus, relative to the paradigm, values and beliefs means “a group of principles, standards, tenets, or dogma considered inherently worthwhile, accept- able or desirable.” Everyone, regardless of his environment or socioeco- nomic circumstances, has a set of values and beliefs. What- ever one’s values and beliefs, they have basically been derived through one of five sources: (1) folkway, (2) custom and tradi- tion, (3) social norms, (4) law, or (5) religion. (1) FOLKWAY: Many of one’s values and beliefs come to him through folkway; another way to express this is to say “the way of the folks.” Many of the things one believes and the values one reports have not been given per- sonal scrutiny and/or study. One simply holds to these values and beliefs because he was told to do so by the folks. Obvi- ously, the merits of such values and beliefs are questionable. Although it might be conceded that many beliefs and values derived through folkway are quite proper and appro- priate, the basis of their origin places them outside of one’s own mental selection and makes them more a matter of the socialization process. Folkway is deeply ingrained within the individual and invokes a power of persuasion seldom fully recognized by the individual. (2) CUSTOM AND TRADITION: Another source of one’s values and beliefs is derived through custom and tra- dition. As one grows up, those beliefs and values that were the custom of the time, whether it was the length of hair, a bearded face, or style of clothing, became his values and

beliefs, and many of them are still with him today. Values and beliefs imparted to one by both folkway and custom/tradition are a part of one’s heritage gained at a very young and impressionable age. Often, when an individ- ual refers to his roots, he is referring not only to a physical setting but also to a mental setting where problem solving and decision making were a matter for adults and imparted to the children. It was an impressionable time when the concepts of right and wrong, good and bad were dictated outside of the individual’s own capabilities of choice. Another term for some of these values and beliefs might very well be “preju- dices.” (3) SOCIAL NORMS: The third source from which one’s values and beliefs are acquired is by way of what is to be referred to as “social norms.” Social norms are those behavioral expectations held by present society and viewed as acceptable, proper, mannerly, or non-acceptable, improper, or unmannerly. Every time one encounters a friend, listens to the radio, watches television, reads the newspaper, or browses through a magazine he is being confronted by views that are saying, in essence, “In today’s society we believe…” Through the influences of social norms, an individual learns how one is to smell, what books one is to read, which movies are to be attended, what type of clothing is to be worn, what car is to be driven, what type of house is to be built, the best place to live, the television program to be watched, the events to be attended, or which causes are to be supported. (4) LAW: The fourth source in the filter of values and beliefs is identified as “law.” The reference to law is more inclusive than just the law of the land or legal law; it includes corporate rules and regulations and/or regulations invoked by groups or organizations of which one is a member. The conformity required by such entities might seem insignificant at first but, over a period of time, regulations instilled by outside agencies and organizations have a way of becoming values and beliefs within the individual. It is not unusual for an individual to dress and act in private life to a conformity that was regimented by the work environment.

(5) RELIGION: The last source in the values and beliefs filter is referred to as “religion.” Although this factor is listed last, by no means should it be construed as least important. Perhaps it is done so because of the biblical refer- ence, “The first shall be last and the last shall be first.” In many cases, it is the paramount factor. For many individuals, religion is an inherited set of values and beliefs derived through folkway or through a social organization to which the individual is a member. For a few, religion is a philosophy derived through a deliberate mental process resulting in the selection of a deity. When one defines his way of looking on the world, he is setting up the environment for his religious thinking. In other words, religion without metaphysics is impossible except as a theological abstraction. If one cannot find God in the order of the skies or in the breaking of an atom, one is not likely to find God at prayer meetings or in any church. While one might accept the authority of an expert in the field of science, in the field of religion even an authority cannot make beliefs live. The final authority for religion is life itself, and no one can do this by proxy. The decision can be postponed, but not indefinitely. Sometimes the begin- ning of recognizing the need to make the choice comes in the normal process of growth but, frequently, it takes a crisis to open the door to the choice that must be made.

THE STRUCTURE OF VALUES AND BELIEFS

Having identified the five sources relative to the basis of values and beliefs, it must be reported that, while each of these sources contribute to one’s convictions, they are not always in unison or of equal weight. One’s folkway values and beliefs are not always in agreement with those absorbed through social norms and/or law. One’s parents may have taught that marriage should be forever; one’s religion may support the same view. However, social norms and law may not concur with the view. Thus, an individual often finds that within his own concept of values and beliefs, he

encounters a dichotomy―conflicts within his own values and beliefs system. To help prevent such conflicts, man subcon- sciously organizes his convictions into a hierarchy of values and beliefs. To further understand this hierarchy phenome- non, it is appropriate that one considers the structure of values and beliefs.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY VALUES AND BELIEFS

Values and beliefs can be divided into two major cat- egories: primary and secondary. An example of a primary belief for some might be: “there is a God,” “the Earth orbits the sun,” “love exists.” One acquires primary beliefs early in life and continues to strengthen these beliefs by continuously validating them through experiences or events. Primary beliefs may again be divided into three cate- gories: primaries of a “super,” “general,” or “selective” nature. A super primary is either a belief that has an abundant amount of scientific evidence supporting it or, it is a value concept entrenched so deeply in the mind that it will be next to impos- sible to change by external forces. With a general primary, there is usually a great amount of agreement that the belief is correct─“With gravity, weighted objects fall when dropped” is an example of a primary belief that nearly everyone accepts. The last type of primary belief, selective primary, can be illus- trated by such expressions as “the Democratic Party is best,” or “Texas is the greatest state in the Union.” Selective prima- ries are beliefs that are held very strongly by an individual but not always a consensus of the society. The difference between a super primary, a general primary, or a selective primary is in the intensity of the individual’s conviction toward the belief. In addition to primary values and beliefs, there are secondary values and beliefs. Secondary values and beliefs are so called because they are derived from a primary. The belief that “the Baptist church is the best church” is based on a greater primary─“there is a God.” Likewise, the individual who holds that abortion is wrong may have arrived at that

belief based upon a primary belief that human life is sacred. On the other hand, the belief that human life is sacred could be a secondary value based, again, on the belief that “life is sacred because God said so…” Obviously, what is a pri- mary belief to one person could well be a secondary belief to another. The assumption that an individual’s values and beliefs structure is organized along a primary/secondary dimension allows the following conjectures: I. The More Primary The Belief, The More The Individ-

ual Will Resist A Change In The Belief. If one attempts to change an individual’s primary

beliefs, success will be unlikely. This is particularly true if the belief is a super primary or a general pri- mary that has complete consensus within the society. Imagine, if you will, trying to get an American to change his belief that a baseball is round. One might have slightly more success in changing a selective-pri- mary belief that does not have consensus within soci- ety but, even then, the task would be formidable. Few individuals change their belief in the existence of God as a result of any external persuasive message. One’s primary beliefs are so deeply ingrained that little can be done to change them.

Secondary beliefs are more susceptible to change. An individual can change his belief about hairstyle, about the importance or lack of importance of envi- ronmental pollution, about increased taxes, and about the quality of universities. These beliefs are constantly undergoing shifts and changes as a result of new infor- mation being received.

II. Secondary Beliefs That Are Derived From Super Pri- mary Beliefs Are More Resistant To Change Than Secondary Beliefs That Are Not Rooted In A Super Primary Belief.

This principle holds a strong implication: When a belief held by an individual rests on a more primary belief, it may be necessary to change the primary belief

before it could be possible to change the secondary belief.

A belief about abortion is an example. In order to change an individual’s stand opposed to legalized abortion, it may be necessary to change the individ- ual’s attitude toward the value he places on human life. Thus, any attempt to change a secondary belief may not succeed unless it is accompanied by support directed toward the more primary belief that is its foundation.

III. The More Primary The Belief That Is Changed, The More Widespread Will Be The Change In The Remain- der Of The Individual’s Secondary Belief Structure.

One’s primary beliefs are the keys to secondary beliefs. If one believes in God, he may also believe in the Bible as an authority, in prayer, in tax exemp- tions for churches, and in the legality of prayer in the public schools. Each of these beliefs may have been derived from the primary belief in God. If the indi- vidual should change his belief about the existence of God, one might expect the individual to also change his beliefs about secondary issues that were derived from his primary ones. In essence, one might find that the change of a single primary belief could have major repercussions in many secondary beliefs held by the individual.

WANTS AND NEEDS

The second filter to be discussed in the paradigm is “wants and needs.” In his landmark book, Motivation and Personality, Abraham Maslow identified five basic types of needs that each individual must satisfy in order to feel safe and enjoy a fulfilled life. Maslow believed that these needs are hierarchical, that is, individuals strive to satisfy the more basic ones before moving on to meet others. He states that the most fundamental category of needs is physiological. An individual must have sufficient air, water, food, and rest in order to live. The other four categories include safety, social, self-esteem, and self-actualization. Maslow, like many psychologists and sociologists, spent considerable time researching the basic biological and psychological needs of man. Most of the research supports a concept of a hierarchy of needs relative to man. Based upon this hierarchy, most researchers conclude that a starv- ing man will most likely compromise his belief that stealing is wrong and will take food if it cannot be obtained in any other way. However, to understand this compromise of beliefs, it is important to discriminate between the concepts of a “need” and a “want.” For clarity, needs will be defined as those things that an individual believes he must have for his own well being. By definition, we will assume that an individual will sacrifice values and/or beliefs for a need. Wants, on the other hand, will be defined as those things that an individual would like to have but would not sacrifice values or beliefs in order to obtain. Wants comprise those things that we would like to have in our life. Wants might include wealth, possessions, or recognition. While wants are less demanding than needs, once an individual has reclassified a want to a need, he will sacrifice values and beliefs to satisfy this newly identified need. Obviously, what is a want to one person might very well be a need to another. More importantly, a want can become a need through the process of self-rationalization or

justification. However, a need can temporarily be forgotten when satisfied. Thus, we will conclude that there are “passive needs” and “active needs.” Passive needs are those needs that an individual believes he must have for his own well being but are being satisfied at the moment. A need being satisfied is no longer creating a demand. Thus, it is passive. On the other hand, active needs are needs that are not presently being satisfied; for these needs, one is exerting effort and energy to obtain sat- isfaction.

RELATIONSHIPS

The next filter to be discussed relative to the paradigm is “relationships.” The working definition of ethics states that “ethics is the study of the general nature of goodness or bad- ness as it relates to specific choices made by an individual in his relationships to self and/or others.” Obviously, the term relationships is one of the keys to an individual’s ethics. Relationships deal with the emotional links one has with other people. In the extreme, these relationships are often referred to as love or hate. However, it should be noted that relationships are not static; they are always in transition. Although Shakespeare declared that “Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds, or bends with the remover to remove,” one must recognize that no relationship is fixed in terms of its intensity or meaning; in fact, all relationships must be defined relative to a point in time. Thus, one can say that a relationship is a relevant or pertinent connection or link between two or more people; and, when there ceases to exist a relevant or pertinent connection, there is no relationship. To understand the concept of relationships, two points must be discussed. First, one needs to look at the basis for relationships; secondly, one should look at a phenomenon known as “group relationships.” What constitutes a relationship? Everyone knows of individuals who are referred to as acquaintances; other indi- viduals are called friends. What is the difference? More importantly, what is the basis for the differences that exist between individuals that one would call friends, acquain- tances, or strangers? Is the answer familiarity? Or, does an acquaintance become a friend over a period of time? If so, do all acquaintances become friends over a period of time? If not, why not? I suggest that relationships develop on the basis of physiological, psychological, and philosophical compatibili- ties. The beginning of relationships might very well be from a physiological basis. One inherits a relationship with his family, if for no other reason, because of the physiological

arrangements. Later in life, he learns of the importance of what is referred to as “first appearances.” Again, he is making reference to the physiological importance of a first time encounter. Yet, as the old cliché goes, “Beauty is only skin deep.” A physiological relationship soon moves to physiological con- siderations. Need, security, nationality or ethnic origins all are part of the psychological relationships that one has with other individuals. If the relationship weathers the psychologi- cal consideration, one may begin to see a deepening of the relationship through philosophical compatibility. Philosophical compatibility has to do with shared values and intellectual acceptability. The more one gets to know an individual, the more one finds that they are drawn together through shared values; or, the relationship may slowly wither as one finds that they do not have so much in common after all.

GROUP RELATIONSHIPS

While man longs for rugged individualism, he is basi- cally a social being. Although he speaks of being different, his house is usually like his neighbors. As man speaks of prin- ciples, he usually compromises his views in order to be rec- ognized; the need to socialize and the need to be recognized drive man to seek membership in groups. Most people will readily identify with their neighbor- hood group, their city group, their state group, their nation group. In addition, man belongs to insurance groups, to sav- ings groups, to veterans groups, to social groups, to political groups, to religious groups, and on and on. Man joins busi- ness clubs, social clubs, civic clubs, country clubs, book clubs, record clubs…; even people with blond hair constitute a group that has “more fun.” Whatever the reason one has for joining a group, it should be recognized that the price extracted from the indi- vidual for joining is a certain amount of conformity. Obvi- ously, some groups are less rule oriented than others, but all groups have values that are translated into rules and regula- tions that must be observed. In extreme cases, one can join a group only to find that the group demands an absolute consis- tency to its values. An example would be cults that demand total conformity of their members. Failure to comply with the rules and regulations of a group can sometimes result in something more than expulsion. Since refusal to comply with group norms might indicate that the rules of the group are improper, the group itself might attack a rule-breaker and demand conformity. In essence, for a person to leave such a group is tantamount to bringing the group’s survival into jeopardy. Under such conditions, great pressure to conform will be exerted by the group on a way- ward member. If being a member of a group requires a certain con- formity to group standards, then one can logically conclude that as an individual joins more and more groups, he runs the risk of encountering personal conflict with his own values and

beliefs. If, in joining the group, an individual is expected to forfeit some of his own values, and if he joins so many groups that the groups themselves conflict in terms of values and beliefs, one can predict the outcome―confusion and ethi- cal instability. While modern society often weighs the success of an individual upon the number of organizations to which he is a member, one might carefully consider the conflict this phe- nomenon creates in one’s values and beliefs. Indeed, if each and every group to which an individual becomes a member has the right to extract a certain amount of conformity, the end result is that an individual must forfeit a certain amount of his own ethical identity.

INTELLIGENCE

The next to the last filter to be discussed in the par- adigm is “intelligence.” The term intelligence means “the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge―the faculty of thought and reason.” Intelligence is used in this model as a synergistic term comprised of three conceptual factors: knowl- edge, experience, and perception. Knowledge has to do with cognitive information; it is information that is known, or can be readily known, because it is available. However, information alone does not guaran- tee intelligence. One must also possess perceptive skills that allow the appropriate application of knowledge and experi- ence to the issues at hand. Otherwise, one can possess infor- mation but be insensitive to its proper application. On the other hand, one may be very perceptive but ignorant of the facts or experience necessary to choose the proper courses of action available. While knowledge attainment might very well be the purpose of education, perceptive skills are more difficult to learn. Certain perceptive skills can be gained through an understanding of human behavior and problem solving, but a timely application of these skills is an art gained only through experience and critical analysis of previous endeavors.

DISCIPLINE

The last filter comprising the paradigm is “discipline.” One can have intelligence yet lack the courage to act; one can have high values and beliefs yet lack the discipline to make a decision. In the final analysis, wants and needs, values and beliefs, relationships, and intelligence are uncontrollable without discipline. The term discipline, as it is applied here, refers to self-control or self-determination derived through a combination of experiences, knowledge and emotional-sets. People have a tendency to repeat a behavior that brought about a desired outcome in the past. This is called “conditioning,” and it is based upon experience. Obviously, experience can be a good teacher. An individual who has sur- vived a crisis and can intelligently evaluate how he survived can use the experience in future references. However, expe- rience alone is a poor substitute for creative thinking. The danger of experience is that future outcomes are not always assured by applying previously learned remedies. In addition to experience, discipline demands control over one’s emotional nature. Fear and frustration are not unknown emotions in anyone; however, some people have learned to cope more effectively than others with such emo- tions. The combination of the abilities to cope with emotional pressure, to deal with problems in an orderly and logical fash- ion, and to critically apply experiences to a pending decision is an essential element in the Ethical Conduct Paradigm.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

As stated in the beginning of this discussion, the para- digm is neither complete nor final. It is, indeed, a point of departure, a view for discussion. Obviously, much more could be said regarding each filter, and more factors are needed to further explain the filters concept. On the other hand, it must be remembered that the paradigm is but an expanded model, it is not a definitive statement; it is but a framework of refer- ence presented to assist each individual in his efforts to better understand his own ethics and the ethics of others.

PRIMARY DEFINITIONS

Ethics: The study of the general nature of goodness or badness as it relates to specific choices made by an individual in his relationship to self and/or others.

One’s ethics: A body of moral standards that influences behavior or choices made, or to be made, by an individual in dealing with self or others.

One’s ethical conduct: Derived from a complex mind system that

influences behavior or choices made, or to be made, by an individual in dealing with self or others.

Filters: An expanded discussion of the variables that comprise the complex mind system relative to the Ethical Conduct Paradigm.

Values and Beliefs: A group of principles, standards, tenets, or

dogma considered inherently worthwhile, acceptable, or desirable.

Wants: Those things an individual would like to have but would not sacrifice values and beliefs in order to obtain.

Needs: Those things an individual feels he must have and will sacrifice values and beliefs in order to obtain.

Relationships: A relevant or pertinent connection or link between two or more people.

Intelligence: A synergistic term comprised of three con- ceptual factors: knowledge, experience, and perception.

Discipline: Self-control or self-determination derived through a combination of experiences, knowl- edge and emotional-set.

Ethics For

Decision-Making Case Studies

By: Douglas W. Warner

No part of this material may be reproduced by any means nor transmitted into a machine language without written permission of D. W. Warner.

First Edition - 1984

Second Edition - 2002

THE CALF-PATH

One day, through the primeval wood, A calf walked home, as good calves should;

But made a trail all bent askew, A crooked trail as all calves do.

Since then two hundred years have fled, And, I infer, the calf is dead.

But still he left behind his trail, And thereby hangs my moral tale.

The trail was taken up next day By a lone dog that passed that way; And then a wise bellwether sheep

Pursued the trail o’er vale and steep, And drew the flock behind him, too,

As good bellwethers always do.

And from that day, o’er hill and glade, Through those old woods a path was made;

And many men wound in and out, And dodged, and turned, and bent about

And uttered words of righteous wrath Because ‘twas such a crooked path.

But still they followed—do not laugh— The first migrations of that calf,

And through this winding wood-way stalked, Because he wobbled when he walked.

This forest path became a lane, That bent, and turned, and turned again;

This crooked lane became a road, Where many a poor horse with his load

Toiled on beneath the burning sun, And traveled some three miles in one.

And thus a century and a half They trod the footsteps of that calf.

The years passed on in swiftness fleet, The road became a village street; And this, before men were aware,

A city’s crowded thoroughfare; And soon the central street was this

Of a renowned metropolis; And men two centuries and a half Trod in the footsteps of that calf.

Each day a hundred thousand rout Followed the zigzag calf about;

And o’er his crooked journey went The traffic of a continent.

A hundred thousand men were led By one calf near three centuries dead. They followed still his crooked way, And lost one hundred years a day;

For thus such reverence is lent To well-established precedent.

A moral lesson this might teach, Were I ordained and called to preach;

For men are prone to go it blind Along the calf-paths of the mind, And work away from sun to sun

To do what other men have done. They follow in the beaten track,

And out and in, and forth and back, And still their devious course pursue,

To keep the path that others do.

But how the wise old wood-gods laugh, Who saw the first primeval calf!

Ah! Many things this tale might teach— But I am not ordained to preach.

Sam Walter Foss

CASE #1

SINKO CORP., A NEPOTISM PROBLEM

Text of a Rough Draft Letter Dictated by John Bozeman, President of SINKO Corp.

Hello Walt, old pal. It was good to hear from you after all these years. I remember those good old days when I used to come to you with all my problems. I’m glad to hear that you are well and enjoying your retirement in the Virgin Islands. Maybe I can impose on you once more, because I have a nasty situation here that should be familiar to you. Maybe you can advise me on how to proceed. But before I go into the gruesome details, allow me to give you some of the background. As you may recall from your invest- ment activities, SINKO Corp. is a publicly owned company which designs, manufactures, assembles, leases, and services automatic, coin-operated washing, drying, and dry-cleaning machines for coin-operated laundries and apartment house laundries. When I say publicly owned, actually the public only owns 40 percent of the shares. The balance is owned by my wife Dolores’ family. Dolores’ father was the founder of the business and when he died, his 60 percent was divided equally among his heirs: Dolores; Mrs. Molaw, my mother- in-law; and Mrs. Veronica Samor, Dolores’ sister. The family has complete control of the board of directors. I myself own just a few thousand shares, which I bought for investment at the time of the first public offering, before I married Dolores. I joined the company after my marriage to Dolores. It rep- resented a financial sacrifice at the time because I had a big job with the Whirlaway Corp., the biggest outfit in the home- laundry business. But old Mr. Molaw had his heart set on keeping the business in the family, so I made the temporary sacrifice. It was worth it, because now I’m in a pretty good position. I’m president and have the confidence of the board and the family. Up to now they’ve been willing to leave everything to me, as long as the profits are good and the divi- dends are paid regularly. But now there’s a fly in the oint- ment. The fly is Veronica’s husband, Chauncey. I received a call from Mrs. Molaw about six weeks

ago, and she told me that darling Chauncey had just been fired from his job and that, after a short European vacation, he would start looking for another position. This was no surprise to me, because my brother-in-law has changed jobs involun- tarily at least once a year for the last ten years. I myself think he’s unemployable, but he is such a charming fellow, so well mannered and handsome, that prospective employers are daz- zled by his surface charisma. But when it comes to doing a day’s work or making a decision, Chauncey cops-out com- pletely. What’s worse, he doesn’t even realize what’s happen- ing. I think there’s something wrong with him psychologi- cally, but the family refuses to face that possibility, particu- larly Veronica. Chauncey and Veronica have a large home and a high standard of living. The dividend income from Veronica’s stock alone is hardly enough to meet the house payments, let alone their other extravagances. Without a regular source of employment income, the Samors would have to cut their stan- dard of living or, horrors, sell their SINKO shares. This last no one wants, least of all me, at least until I can place their shares in friendly hands. When Mrs. Molaw called she asked me if I could find a job for Chauncey somewhere, perhaps in the company. I said I’d think about it and call her back. I called Chauncey and had him come in to meet my division heads to see if any of them could use him. They all turned him down saying that they had no openings for such a high-salaried man. What they really meant was that they didn’t want a member of the family working for them, especially a boob like Chauncey. So, I had to call Mother Molaw back and tell her what had happened and that I’d try to look elsewhere. I did and failed. Chauncey has used up this generation of gullible employers. Meanwhile, my sister-in-law has been calling my wife and having tearful sessions about their increasing indebted- ness and telling Dolores how cruel and heartless I am for refusing to help her husband and give him the top-level job that he so obviously deserves because of their stock owner- ship. My mother-in-law is getting more demanding, too.

I’m determined that this issue is one on which I must be firm. If I give Chauncey a top job with the company, not only will he waste the salary and expenses (you know, an office staff and other perquisites due his exalted rank),

but he’ll cause untold damage within the firm and with our accounts. The man has no judgment whatsoever. I just can’t have him in my hair. My job is complicated enough now. And, if I hire him, there are lots of other Molaw kin that would like to get aboard, too. Hiring Chauncey would set a poor precedent.

Still, I must do something to get my mother-in-law off my back. I don’t want either of them to sell their shares right now and, between mother and daughter, their 40 percent could out vote me, even assuming that I could count on Dolores to back me up. She’s totally unsophisticated when it comes to business matters, and she loves her little sister Veronica. If it came to a showdown, I very much doubt that Dolores would side with me on this issue.

So, Walt, I’m in a bind. I can’t put my incompetent brother-in-law on the payroll because, if I did, he wouldn’t have enough sense to stay away and leave things to me. He’d insist on having a say in the management. He feels so self- important that he’d meddle in everything. I can’t let him get further into debt because that would jeopardize the stock. I’m unwilling to add his household expenses to mine. They already owe me and Dolores more than $50,000. And, I’m so busy with our new line that I can’t waste any more energy thinking about it.

Walt, do you have any suggestions on how I can resolve this matter? Drop me a letter with a few words of wisdom like in the old days? I have another nasty problem on my hands, but this is one I can handle myself. I need a new sheet metal supplier, one large enough and well enough equipped to handle our stamping, forming, plating, and enam- eling needs. My regular supplier was just acquired in a stock deal by my most active competitor, and they gave me notice that they will not be able to take care of all our needs in the future. Finding a new sheet metal house will keep me busy for the next few months. But, I hope you’ll be able to make some constructive suggestions, Walt. At least, give me the benefit of your wisdom; give me a run-down on your ideas. If you can’t find a good idea, tell me the least bad.

QUESTION: What do you think that Mr. Bozeman’s objec- tives are (or should be), and what should he do?

CASE #2

THE STANFORD PRISON STUDY

To study the social psychology of imprisonment, Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues devised an experiment in which they could observe behavior in a simulated prison environ- ment. The inmates were male college student volunteers, as were the guards. Members of both groups received $15 a day for their participation. The expected duration of sentence was two weeks. The simulated jail, in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford University, was divided into cells with bars on the doors and equipped with the minimum amount of furniture; the toilets were public. The mock pris- oners were “arrested” in realistic manner by the local police department, booked, stripped, examined, given prison clothes and a number, and incarcerated. The guards were in uniform with silvered sunglasses, billy clubs, and handcuffs. The atmosphere was oppressive. The results of this experiment were dramatic; seem- ingly typical college students began to behave in strange ways. The pseudoprisoners became increasingly disturbed; the pseudoguards became quite brutal. After three days, the first prisoner was released because he showed signs of severe emotional disturbance. Before the experiment was prema- turely terminated after six days, three other prisoners of the total ten had to be released because they were seriously dis- turbed. The guards also were affected. They relied heavily on physical force and harassment. For example, one of the guards commented: “I was surprised at myself…I made them call each other names and clean the toilets out with their bare hands. I practically considered the prisoners cattle, and I kept thinking I have to watch out for them in case they try some- thing.” The investigators were surprised by the relative ease with which sadistic behavior could be elicited from normal, non-sadistic people and the extent of the emotional distur- bance that emerged in young men selected precisely on the

basis of their emotional stability. The pathology observed in this study cannot be attributed to any pre-existing personality differences of the subjects. Rather, their abnormal social and personal reactions were a product of their transaction with an environment whose norms and contingencies supported the production of behavior that would be pathological in other settings but was “appropriate” in this prison. Findings such as these could have considerable impact on the administration of prisons and prison-reform efforts.

CASE #3

TO MY FAMILY, MY PHYSICIAN, MY LAWYER AND ALL OTHERS WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

Death is as much a reality as birth, growth, maturity, and old age; it is the one certainty of life. If the time comes when I can no longer take part in decisions for my own future, let this statement stand as an expression of my wishes and directions while I am still of sound mind. If at such a time the situation should arise in which there is no reasonable expectation of my recovery from extreme physical or mental disability, I direct that I be allowed to die and not be kept alive by medications, artificial means or “heroic measures.” I do, however, ask that medications be mercifully administered to me to alleviate suffering even though this may shorten my remaining life. This statement is made after careful consideration and is in accordance with my strong convictions and beliefs. I want the wishes and directions here expressed carried out to the extent permitted by law. Insofar as they are not legally enforceable, I hope that those to whom this will is addressed will regard themselves as morally bound by these provisions.

Signed:_____________________________ Date: ________

Witness:____________________________ Date:________

CASE #4

JUSTICE

We are all for justice; but, what is justice? John, a soldier, awakens at a field hospital. His request for water goes unnoticed, and though his mind is still muddled and confused, he is able to gather his faculties and go for a bucket of water. As he returns with his water and starts to drink, a discussion ensues from those around him. A soldier lying on a cot next to John who is unable to get up tells John that he should share his water with him and with others. John replies that he does not intend to share it with anyone; he had gone for the water and now he would drink it. A third soldier pleads, “You can go get more, give it to those of us who need it the most.” What is justice? Would it be just for John to drink the water because he had merited it, he had gone and gotten it? Or would it be only proper that he should give the water to those who needed it most, for he could go get more? What is justice? Perhaps the better word is, what is distributive justice and who decides?

CASE #5

THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY

There was a prosecuting attorney who had a person on trial for an infraction of the law for which there was a lot of circumstantial evidence. The prosecuting attorney is reason- ably sure that he will win his case and put the person behind bars for a number of years. Grant in the case that this person being tried was really a “bad” guy, bad news for society. He worked for the syndi- cate taking contracts to kill, sold drugs to children and, for fun, he raped women. However, he was clever and concealed evidence, and although tried before, was never proven guilty. It happens that the prosecuting attorney uncovers some evidence in the particular trial in question that completely exonerates this person of this particular crime. Only the pros- ecuting attorney knows this evidence, and no one else will ever know that he ran across this evidence. What ought the prosecuting attorney do? Not just what does the law say in this case, but what is his moral obli- gation? Should he protect society from this known bad guy by sitting on the evidence and putting him behind bars? Or, should he reveal his secret evidence and let the bad guy go free, allowing him to continue his life of crime against soci- ety?

CASE #6

ELECTRO INDUSTIRES

Electro Industries designs, manufactures, and markets high-precision electronic instruments to computer makers and to contractors for the United States Department of Defense. Although Electro has a standard line of products used both for commercial and military applications, it also makes special integrated circuits to customer order. Jack Hill, Electro’s vice-president for marketing, has been fairly successful with the precision electronics line. Electro is an approved supplier for several computer chip users in the United States, Canada, and several European countries. Unfortunately, as Jack Hill discovered quite early in his tenure at Electro, there is a vast difference between being placed on a customer’s approved list of suppliers and receiv- ing regular orders. Electro has been successful in obtaining a good share of specialty orders from some customers, but for others, Hill has not been able to progress beyond the sample- order stage. One very large user, the Cal-Tech Industries, proved especially baffling to Hill. They used thousands of circuits every year of exactly the types that Electro supplied; Electro’s prices were competitive, but in spite of a repeated and intense wooing of the customer, Electro received no more than sample orders from Cal-Tech. Hill’s failure to break into Cal-Tech was proving to be an embarrassment because his boss, Horace Hudd, had taken a personal interest in Hill’s progress with this account. One day in March, Hill was attending an industry trade show in New York City. He was standing in Electro’s display booth answering inquiries when he was approached by a dap- per-looking man of indeterminate age. The man said: “I can see from your badge that you’re Jack Hill. I’ve been looking forward to meeting you, Jack. My name is Marty Ackersen.”

The two men shook hands, then Ackersen said: “Jack, I’m here representing a client. I work as an industrial pur- chasing consultant for Cal-Tech Industries. You sell to them, don’t you?” “Yes, but not nearly enough,” Hill answered. “Would you like to sell them more than you now do?” “I sure would.” “I’m glad to hear that, Jack. Suppose I look into my contacts at Cal-Tech and see if I can be of any help. Where can I reach you?” “I’m here most of the day. At night I’m at our hospi- tality suite at the Hartford Inn.” “Good,” Ackersen said. “And when do you close up shop for the night?” “About midnight.” “Suppose I call you before twelve if I have anything. OK?” “Sure, Marty,” Hill replied. “I’ll look forward to hear- ing from you.” Ackersen departed and Hill finished his stint at the dis- play booth. He had a solitary dinner and then resumed his duty at the hospitality suite. At eleven-thirty Ackersen called and asked Hill to meet him at the bar in the lobby. They met there and retired to a secluded table in the cocktail lounge. After some desultory trade chatter, Ackersen looked squarely at Hill and said: “Jack, I have a proposition for you. I spent a few hours today with the Cal-Tech people. I think we can work something out that will be good for you.” “Great,” Hill answered. “Let’s hear about it.” “Jack, I don’t know how long you’ve been in the busi- ness, but I’m a real old-timer. I’ve learned that sometimes the straightforward and conventional approach to a buyer is less successful than the devious approach. I know that you’ve been trying to sell Cal-Tech for a long time without even get- ting to first base. Am I right?” “Right,” Hill answered. “So what?” “So, I’m the answer to your prayers. I have the instru- ment buyer in my pocket. I have him eating out of my hand.”

“What do you mean?” Hill asked. “He’s my boy. I have him in my pocket. He’ll do any- thing I ask. I’m his benefactor. He owes me a lot.” “Really? How will that help me?” “I can get him to buy your electronic goods in place of someone else’s.” “Good. Let’s go,” Hill said. “When do I get an order?” “Not so fast, buddy. Hear me out,” Ackersen said. “Oh, there’s a catch?” “No catch, but there’s procedure we have to follow.” “What is it?” “It’s simple enough,” Ackersen said. “Here’s what we’ll do. You make an I-80Q modem relay that Cal-Tech uses. Right?” “That’s right.” “And you sell it for $3,000 for the standard model. You charge a small premium for extras or for special customer specifications.” “That’s right. Extra accessories and special testing can add as much as 25 percent to the cost.” “Good. Here’s what we’ll do. Cal-Tech purchasing department will place orders for the I-80Q modem, but they will use their own model number and they will add some triv- ial specifications that shouldn’t cost much to meet. You quote them 15 percent more than the regular price for the standard model, $3,450 to be exact. When you get paid, you kick back the 15 percent premium to me. I split it three ways; $150 for you, $150 for me, and $150 for the buyer. We may be able to place orders for 500 I-80Q relays a year plus some other items with the same kind of deal. That’s a nice piece of change for everybody. And it’s so simple. All you do is appoint me your special sales agent for the Cal-Tech account and pay me a 15 percent commission. What do you say, Jack? Isn’t that a sweetheart deal?” Hill stared at Ackersen but held back the harsh words he felt rising in his throat. He pretended to be thinking over Ackersen’s offer, then he said, “I don’t know. We already

have a sales agent for that account. If I cut him out after all the work he’s put into the account, he’d get suspicious and complain.” “Why cut him out? Let him have his regular commis- sion. Your regular price includes an allowance for his com- mission.” “That’s true, but if I have to pay two commissions, there’s bound to be questions. My boss would then get involved. I couldn’t keep it quiet.” “Who’s your boss, Horace Hudd?” “Yes.” “Oh, I know Horace Hudd very well. Why don’t you talk to him when you get back? But don’t say anything about your 5 percent cut. Tell him that we have to pay off the buyer and the buyer’s boss. He’ll understand that. I’m sure he’s worked deals like that before himself.” “I don’t know. Let me think about it,” Hill said. “OK, Jack,” Ackersen yawned. “I’m getting tired. I’ve had a long day. I think I’ll hit the sack…Jack. I’ll call you in a week or so to get your answer. I’m looking forward to doing a nice piece of business for Electro Industries as their special sales agent. And you’ll be a hero, Jack, if we can pull the deal off. But remember, it’s this way or nothing. You won’t be able to sell anything to Cal-Tech any other way.” As a friend, Jack has brought his problem to you. What is your advice?

CASE #7

CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY

In 1980 the Campbell Soup Company’s director for marketing for canned goods stated, “We were thinking of some way to identify ourselves on the local level where we could help the education process.” A group of executives came up with the idea of a “label for education” program, the basis of which was the redemption of soup-can labels for audio-visual equipment for elementary schools. Campbell Soup approached various schools and PTA groups about the idea and received plenty of acceptance. But Campbell’s sophisticated marketing staff wanted to test the program and did so in Minneapolis, Milwaukee, and Buffalo. Since the tests proved successful, this year Campbell Soup moved ahead on a national scale. During the two-month test of the “label for education” program, Campbell Soup received 70 million labels. “That’s a lot of soup. M’m M’m good, not only for us but also for the 12,000 schools,” stated the marketing executive. More than 50,000 pieces of audio-visual equipment were sent to schools. A cassette player was sent for redeeming 1,800 labels. A Bell and Howell 16mm projector was sent for 44,100 labels. The marketing executive stated the value of the soup was worth more than $1,000,000. “Very few companies would have the frequency of purchase of a product to package social goodwill with increased sales. We’ve received many letters from people expressing appreciation for the program.” However, the marketing executive’s view of the success of the soup campaign was somewhat diminished by letters being received by the legal department. Several educational groups dedicated to the protection of students were concerned. They felt the program exploited students. Their argument stated that Campbell used schools only to sell more products and gave the impression of being “good guys” while passing the cost on to a duped public. Mrs. Kathy Ray, wife of Senator Ray, an outspoken representative for the organization called

Protection for Students, stated, “Campbell Soup has commit- ted one of the greatest atrocities in the history of American advertising. In the name of goodwill they have exploited schools and children throughout the United States. Campbell has been involved in the highest form of exploitation. Every- one should realize that every piece of school equipment pro- vided by Campbell’s was paid for through the force feeding of soup to unwilling students.” Although the legal department says that Campbell has not done anything illegal, the public relations department was extremely concerned. Jim Bowes, Vice President of Public Relations, best summarized the situation, “We must do some- thing quick or consumer advocate groups are going to get involved in this crusade and ruin our PR image.” The market- ing department sees it differently, “Over 12,000 schools were involved in this program, and over 50,000 pieces of audio- visual equipment were sent to schools. Let’s see any con- sumer advocate group match those numbers.” As the president, you must develop a plan and make such decisions as required to handle this matter. The Board of Directors has requested that you provide them with complete details as to how you will handle this situation.

* Update: The Campbell’s “Labels for Education” program is still in existance. For more information, visit their web site at www.labelsforeducation.com.

RULES FOR PARTICIPATION

(Please read and follow carefully)

1. Only schools with any of the grades K through 8 in the United States or its territories are eligible for the Campbell Soup Company Labels for Educa- tion Program.

2. The RESERVATION FORM must be completed and postmarked no later than December 1, 1980. NOTE: This form requires an indication of your goal(s) so that suppliers of the equipment may be alerted to have an adequate inventory on hand. At the end of the program, other and/or additional items may be selected.

3. Labels from the regular size Campbell’s Soup, as well as the 26-oz. and 50-oz. sizes (red & white label), Campbell’s “Soup for One” Soups, Camp- bell’s Chunky Soups, all Campbell’s Beans prod- ucts, all Franco-American products, “V-8” Cock- tail Vegetable Juice, Campbell’s Tomato Juice and all Swanson* Canned Food products are eli- gible for collection. (Although the labels collected come from various size cans of various costs, EACH LABEL IS THE SAME VALUE. The number of labels required for each piece of equip-ment has been adjusted to reflect these dif-ferences.)

4. The 12 week label collection period will begin Monday, December 1, 1980 and end Friday, Feb- ruary 20, 1981.

5. Labels must be sent to Maple Plain, Minnesota no later than March 21, 1981. Ship via Parcel Post or United Parcel Service, postage paid. DO NOT SEND LABELS TO CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY IN CAMDEN, N.J.—IT WILL ONLY DELAY HANDLING!

6. Labels may be redeemed only for items listed in the catalog at the designated label quanti- ties. There can be no special orders, substi- tutions or requests to break up sets. Cash or partial cash cannot be accepted.

7. All correspondence and questions pertaining to this program are to be directed to: CAMP- BELL’S LABELS FOR EDUCATION PRO- GRAM, POST OFFICE BOX 3011, MAPLE PLAIN, MN 55348 and not Campbell Soup Company in Camden, New Jersey.

8. Labels collected by schools during the twelve weeks period, December 1, 1980 through Febru- ary 20, 1981, in conjunction with this program, are valued at 1/100 of $.01. They are of far greater value when redeemed for merchandise.

9. This offer is void where restricted or prohib- ited by law.

10.Please allow approximately 12 weeks for deliv- ery of the items ordered. The merchandise will be shipped from various points and may arrive separately.

Only schools with any of the grades K through 8 in the United States or its territories are eligible for the Campbell’s Soup Company Labels for Education Program.

*Campbell’s, “Soup for One”, Franco-American, “V-8” and Swanson are registered trademarks of Campbell Soup Company.

CASE #8

DIAMOND FIND, INC.

Diamond Find, Inc. is a jewelry store chain located in the metropolitan area. The potential for employee theft in this type of business is always great, and Diamond Find, Inc. has always taken extensive preventative measures. Any applicant for employment must provide considerable personal data and be willing to submit to a pre-employment and regularly sched- uled polygraph tests. Prior to employment, credit bureau and private investigator checks are also made. Recently, prospects and current employees of the com- pany have become increasingly critical of Diamond Find’s investigating practices. A number of well-qualified employ- ees have stopped working for the company because of what they consider to be an invasion of their privacy. As president of the company, you have been asked by the Board of Directors to identify the costs and benefits associated with this practice. Should other economic consid- erations be of importance? You are to recommend a policy position for the continuation or removal of this practice to the Board.

CASE #9 MELINDA’S DILEMMA

A strictly enforced company rule states that an employee who leaves his or her area of work without first obtaining permission shall be considered to have quit the job. Melinda reported for work as usual on the second shift, Thursday afternoon. Shortly after she arrived, she asked her supervisor if she could be absent during the second half of the shift to attend a school meeting. The supervisor denied her request in a friendly, courteous manner. He explained that if he excused Melinda to go to a school function, he would, in all fairness, have to allow others who made a similar request. Melinda concluded that, in this case, she should not have reported for work at all. The fact is, the records show that she had a perfect attendance record for the year-to-date. She could have been absent the entire shift without fear of dis- ciplinary action. Because lunch is only for half an hour, employees eat in the company lounge area. However, at lunch, Melinda left the plant and did not return for the remainder of the shift. When Melinda reported for work the following day, her supervisor informed her that she had walked off the job, and she was presumed to have quit. Therefore, she no longer worked there. Within minutes, Melinda, accompanied by the shop steward, was in your office wanting to file a grievance. You are the president. How will you handle this issue? More importantly, justify your actions, realizing that this deci- sion will have bearings on future, similar decisions.

CASE #10

ACE BRICK COMPANY

“The point I’m trying to make,” said Betty Waits, pro- duction supervisor with Ace Brick Co., “is that we simply can’t afford to carry John Mullins for another three years.” Waits was referring to a sixty-two year old, thirty-year employee in her charge. In her view John Mullins, while still exhibiting the same degree of competence he always had, in recent years had showed a marked decline in productivity. As Waits put it, “In many cases, John takes twice as long as nec- essary to do a task, twice as long as he took five years ago.” She was pointing out to Ace’s President that such a decline in productivity not only hurt the firm but also was undermin- ing morale in her division. The President asked her to be spe- cific. “Well,” she began, “as you know, we have a consid- erable complement of bright, young, ambitious people. I’m thinking of one in particular, Bill Gofar, who’s been with us seven years. He came to us right out of college. Bill shows considerable promise. But his morale recently has plummeted, primarily because of John. For one thing, Bill finds himself spending too much time doing John’s job as well as his own, so that the division can meet production goals. What’s more, Gofar is eager for and deserving advance- ment.” “Gofar would like to be quality control engineer?” the President asked with pointed reference to John Mullin’s posi- tion. “He’s next in line for it,” Waits replied. “Can’t Bill be patient for a few more years?” sug- gested the President. “I don’t think so,” Waits said. “He’s already alluded to offers he’s had elsewhere, and I’m convinced they’re genuine. Any firm would love to have him, and I can see why.” The President sat silently for a moment before saying, “As you know, Betty, our voluntary retirement age is sixty-five.”

“But John’s not going to retire voluntarily,” Waits said adamantly. “You know that for a fact?” queried the President. “He’s said as much.” “Do you mean John wants to stay on till he’s sev- enty?” the president wanted to know. Waits said he would. Then she added, “But even if John were going to retire at sixty-five, in my professional judgment we can ill afford to indulge him for another three years.” The President reminded Waits of how much the com- pany prided itself on its compassionate treatment of its senior members. He emphasized that this stemmed from the compa- ny’s recognition of the invaluable contribution these employ- ees had made to Ace’s currently attractive profit picture. But he was quick to add, “Of course, that doesn’t justify feather- bedding.” Waits acknowledged that forcing someone to retire presented delicate legal and moral problems. “I know,” she said, “that John would suffer financially.” “In fact,” the President pointed out, “he stands to lose about 50 percent in retirement benefits against mandatory retirement at seventy.” “But is that consideration enough to justify produc- tivity losses?” Waits asked him. “Is it enough to jeopardize losing a highly qualified and productive person like Bill Gofar?” “You’ve put the choice I face starkly,” the President said, “but most accurately.”

1. What should the president do? 2. What moral directions do the ethical theories pro-

vide? 3. Suppose the president summons John for a conference

at which time he explains the situation to him. Upon reflection, John agrees that he’s not as productive as he once was, that he is a liability to the firm. Do you think John then would have a moral obligation to retire?

CASE #11

WHO SHALL LIVE?

The country is under the threat of nuclear war. In this part of the country, there are very few shelters where people could sustain themselves for a period of six months—the time estimated it would take before land would be safe for reoccu- pation. You have been chosen to determine which of various individuals should be given access to particular bomb shel- ters (the selectors have indicated that they would prefer not to compete for such openings). For one of these shelters, the list has been reduced from 200 to 10. You are to further reduce the list to 5. The best procedure would be to rank-order the 10 individually and then arrive at a decision. Those being con- sidered are (ages are in parentheses):

A famous musician (47) A nuclear physicist (51)

A young woman, six months pregnant (23) A policeman (41)

An accountant (28) (husband of the young woman) A nun-schoolteacher (31) A professional athlete (35)

A female dancer-entertainer (28) A medical student-Negro (25)

A priest (56)

CASE #12

ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR

New Rochelle, N.Y., October 27th *.—When the red light turns to green and reads Thank You at any one of the automatic toll booths of the New England Thruway here, it does not always mean what it says, at least not if the motorist has short-changed the machine or dropped lead washers or foreign coins into it. The state police reported today, after a two-week cam- paign against toll cheaters, that they had arrested 151 persons. They have been fined in City Court from $25 each for the first offenders to $150 for multiple offenders. Lieutenant Thomas F. Darby reported that the offend- ers included a clergyman, a doctor, a dentist, an atomic sci- entist, lawyers, and quite a number of engineers, advertising men and salesmen. “What the offenders did not know,” the Lieutenant said, “was that new toll booth glass with one-way vision pre- vented them from seeing watchful troopers inside.” “Neither did they know,” the Lieutenant continued, “that the license plate of each offender was recorded along with the objects he dropped into the machine.”

1. Do you think that this behavior is serious? Do you think these persons are likely to be dishonest in other ways that would be more serious?

2. Under what circumstances might you have been caught?

Date line “New Rochelle” The New York Times, October 28, 1961.

CASE #13

CLONES (Taken from an article in Discover magazine; August, 1984)

By Splitting Embryos, Researchers Have Created Identical Twin Horses. The Technique Could Eventually Be Used To Duplicate Human Beings.

At the end of May 1984, in the operating shed of Colo- rado State University’s animal reproduction lab, two remark- able colts were born. Each was carried by a separate brood mare—but the two were identical twins. They are the first horse twins to have been produced by a simple new procedure that could soon make such twinning commonplace. Created eleven months earlier when scientists cleaved a single fertil- ized egg, the twins are essentially clones, carrying identical sets of genetic material. Researchers adding new twists to embryo transfer have recently performed some downright exotic experiments. In May, for example, a horse at the Louisville Zoo delivered a healthy zebra that had been placed in her uterus as an embryo. And at Cornell University this spring, a mule, the sterile hybrid of a horse and a donkey, gave birth to a thoroughbred horse that had been implanted as an embryo. Two other mules are expected to give birth this fall, one to another thorough- bred, one to a donkey. Given a few additional refinements—the ability to freeze divided embryos without damage, say, or to remove and replace pronuclei, the two packets of genetic material that join to make the nucleus of a fertilized egg—researchers could perform even more astonishing feats. They could, for instance, make it possible for a horse to give birth to her own twin. Says Edward Squires, an equine reproduction biologist at Colorado State, “You could blow your mind thinking about the possibilities.” These modern animal husbandry techniques work not just with calves and colts but also with people. An increas-

ing number of couples who have difficulty conceiving are turning to in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer as a way around their problem. Both of these methods for manipulat- ing human embryos were first developed and tested with ani- mals. For this reason, the artificial twinning techniques now being explored with horses have profound implications. “In not too long a time,” says Squires, “the technology for doing almost anything we can think of will be there. The only thing holding us back will be ethical considerations.” Experiments with rats and rabbits by Seidel and others in the 1950s indicated that embryos are armed with built-in redundancy. Blastocysts—seven to ten-day-old embryos con- taining about 60 to 100 identical cells and surrounded by a protective sac called the zona pellucida—can survive substan- tial losses of cells. As many as three quarters of a blastocyst’s 100 or so cells can be damaged or removed, yet the embryo will still survive and grow into a normal organism.

CASE #14

THE OLD BAIT AND SWITCH GAME

The advertising of low-priced sewing machines, wash- ers, and dryers by Sears, Roebuck & Co. resulted in an accu- sation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The charge claimed that Sears was guilty of advertising these appliances at low prices and then trying to sell the customer higher-priced items, a technique commonly referred to as the “bait and switch” tactic. The commission threatened to file a formal complaint, forcing the issue into court, unless Sears agreed to negotiate a consent decree. The FTC’s allegation stemmed from an ad by Sears offering a portable sewing machine for $58. Upon a custom- er’s arrival, however, salespeople (who were paid on a com- mission basis) supposedly would try to sell the customer a higher-priced machine. The FTC also claimed the same thing has been done with washers and dryers. According to Stepha- nie Kanwit, who directs the FTC’s Chicago office, “Salespeo- ple know they will not make money if they sell too many low- priced items.” Sears contended that the facts of this investigation “do not substantiate (its) conclusions.” The merchandising vice president for this retail firm quoted statistics showing that Sears sold over 80,000 of the machines in question during the time span in which the FTC is interested. This volume of sales constitutes “the third highest unit sales of the more than twenty different models in Sears’ entire line of sewing machines.” In an extraordinary display of disunity by the FTC commissioners, Mayo J. Thompson sided with Sears, arguing that the complaint contained “no showing of probable con- sumer injury.”

1. Do you agree with Mr. Thompson? 2. What ethical principles should be required (if any) of

sales people? 3. Do you see this case having any ethical violations? If

so, what? 52

CASE #15

THE ISLAND OF “KORA”

After several days in a storm, during which time your ship was blown off course and sunk, you were washed ashore on an island known as “Kora.” The natives on the Island of Kora are gentle, and they believe that you are a special envoy from the gods. They have named you Supreme Ruler and Lord over the whole island. Your word is law. However, with your new found honor and authority comes the burden of responsibility. The elders of the tribe have come to you to solve their more pressing problems. As the elders tell you their problems, the following events and information are learned. It appears that approximately four years ago the island underwent a violent earthquake caused by an erupting vol- cano. Prior to the volcanic activity, the island was about four times larger than it is now. However, violent earthquakes caused by the volcano ended with three-fourths of the island dropping into the sea. Although much of the land that had been used for farming and grazing cattle was lost, only three natives were killed during the event. Now, an island, which had once been 5 x 4 miles, is only 2 x 2 miles. It appears the balance of nature has been upset. From the natives you learned that prior to the earth- quakes, the island supported about 850-900 natives. There was peace and tranquility and plenty to eat. Prior to the earth- quakes, the natives had been spread out over the island in family groups; now, however, out of fear resulting from the earthquakes, all the huts have been gathered close together and conditions are crowded. Presently, the situation on the island is rather bleak. For the last three years, the rate of deaths has increased because of an apparent increase in diseases and starvation. Also, most of the farm animals look very poor physically, and most are diseased. Already, over 100 natives have died from starvation or disease, and nearly the whole population looks

sick from either disease or malnutrition. Sanitation problems in the village are atrocious and stealing and fighting have become commonplace. As best you can figure, it seems that an island that could once support 850-900 natives has been reduced to one- fourth of its original size. Even with all of the technology that you know, you see no way in which the island can support more than 250 people. Since you were sent by the gods, the natives and elders expect you to solve all their problems. What is your plan?

1. What should they do about their moral decay—stealing and fighting?

2. Mostly, what can they do so that they will have enough to eat?