Ethics

The paper provides a brief analysis of ethical theories. A brief analysis of ethical case study is provided. Utilitarianism, the categorical imperative, rights and justice theories are discussed. The paper provides recommendations to the company and its managers.

Keywords ethics, corporate, utilitarian, categorical imperative, justice, rights.
Ethical decision-making in organizations requires that managers take into account, predict, and reconsider the interests of stakeholders and potential benefits losses they will have to carry as a result of various organizational decisions. Stakeholder interests is the basic criterion measuring how managers must behave (Bowie, 2002). In case of Joe, the stakeholders include shareholders, managers, employees, customers and suppliers, and governmental bodies responsible for collecting taxes. Shareholders seek profitability and want to have the fullest information about how the company of their choice operates. Managers and employees are interested in the stability of the firm for which they work, and must be able to timely address the emerging organizational complexities. Customers seek fairness and quality, while suppliers want to ensure that the company can fulfill its financial and contractual obligations. Finally, government regulatory bodies are the primary arbiter of the companys financial and business actions.

THESIS. In his situation, Joe must approach the CEO directly, to make sure that John has the fullest information about the problem and can minimize its negative influence on the companys stakeholders.

Legal analysis.
The only law that applies to this case is employment at-will doctrine.
Because Joe is afraid of losing his position of the district manager, he must be aware of the second exception to the termination for just cause or no cause principle (eGuide, Chapter 3). The latter implies that if employees refuse to lie under oath, the employer does not have any right to terminate them (eGuide, Chapter 3). The company does not have a legal right to make Joe submit incorrect information and documentation to the CEO.

Unfortunately, neither the Sarbanes-Oxley Act nor the Securities Act applies because the case does not involve security issues and the corporation of choice is a private entity.

Ethical analysis.
What Joe should do is called whistleblowing, and implies that an employee discloses information about malpractice or other organizational issue which is not otherwise known, in the reasonable belief that this is malpractice and the disclosure is in the public interest (Davies, 1997).

A. The categorical imperative managers in organizations must analyze their
motives and the reasons of their actions (eGuide, Chapter 1). Joes supervisor Mary wants Joe to submit inaccurate information and false documentation to pursue her self-interests. Joe can either choose not to report to CEO at all or to report the information that is realistic, truthful, objective, and relevant otherwise, his actions will fail the categorical imperative test.

B. The utilitarian theory any act, despite its legal implications, can be labeled ethical
as long as it promotes the greatest good for the greatest number of people (eGuide, Chapter 1). The consequences of Joes misbehaviors can range from the companys failure to improve its system and as a result, the quality of its business performance, to the companys failure to meet its financial and ethical obligations. The risks of Joes termination are relevant, but Mary can lose her job, too. The utilitarian perspective will require that Joe reports the fullest information to the CEO directly, to minimize the negative consequences of misinformation even if, as a result of Joes actions, Mary loses her job, this loss will be ethically justified as the necessary precondition for promoting the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

C. The rights theory by following Marys directive, Joe would violate the basic rights
of all stakeholders, including himself. The CEO, as well as other stakeholders, has the right to have the fullest information about how the company operates. In the employment contexts, CEOs have the right to request the fullest company information from their subordinates. No supervisor has the right to make subordinates lie to promote their self-interest. Joe would have to choose to approach the CEO directly, to ensure his rights and the rights of other stakeholders are not violated.

The justice theory Joe would have to recognize that Marys directive promotes
injustice with regard to all stakeholders, including the CEO. According to the justice theory, the end never justifies the means, especially if the end itself is unethical (eGuide, Chapter 1). Even if lies result in temporarily stability within the companys environment, they do not leave the CEO and other stakeholders a chance to access and use the fullest information about the company.

Conclusion
Utilitarianism, the categorical imperative, rights and justice ethical theories present different views on one and the same problem but usually lead to one and the same conclusion. In his case, Joe must approach the CEO directly, to provide him with the fullest information about the problem. First, even if none of the laws from the eGuide apply to the situation, the falsification of business records is a crime and implies legal punishment. It is even more serious of a crime, if an employee has to submit incorrect information and documentation about the system under the threat of termination (eGuide, Chapter 3). Second, this is a misdemeanor that violates a whole range of ethical norms, standards, and rights, including the right for stakeholders to have the fullest information about the company (eGuide, Chapter 1). The unethical consequences of Joes actions may range from the companys inability to timely address the issue to the companys failure to minimize its negative influence on profitability and performance (eGuide, Chapter 1).

Third, because Joe is aware of the problem and his supervisor Mary refuses to deal with it, the best Joe can do is to inform the CEO directly, to ensure that the information he provides is full, relevant, objective, and justified. Eventually, by taking a step toward the CEO, Joe will secure himself from the risks of termination, will promote justice and the greatest good for the majority, and will also guard stakeholders rights, by giving the company a chance to improve its system and, as a consequence, the efficiency of its organizational performance.