Case 2 Rubric For Requirement 3 Only: Category, Rating, Comm

Case 2 Rubric For Requirement 3 Onlycategoryratingcomments1unsati

Identify the core assignment prompt from the provided content, removing any extraneous information such as grading rubrics, point allocations, meta-instructions, due dates, or repetitive lines. Focus solely on the main instructional question or task that guides the writing or analysis required. The remaining concise and essential text forms the assignment instructions for your paper.

Paper For Above instruction

The primary task is to analyze and discuss the ethical considerations involved in Danna Lumus's decision to alter the sales forecast for a new line of paper napkins, considering her motivations and potential impacts on employees and managerial decision-making. This includes evaluating her decision to revise the forecast downward from 30,000 to 22,000 cases, assessing whether her actions are ethically justified, and debating if and how the impact on employees should influence managerial decisions. Additionally, the paper should explore whether it is unethical not to factor employee impacts into business decisions, supported by relevant ethical theories, organizational strategy principles, and empirical research.

Paper For Above instruction

In today’s complex organizational environments, ethical decision-making plays a crucial role in aligning business practices with moral principles, especially when decisions significantly impact employees. The case of Danna Lumus presents a compelling scenario to examine the ethical implications of manipulating business forecasts to serve broader organizational or social goals. This paper aims to analyze her decision to alter the sales forecast downward from 30,000 to 22,000 cases, evaluate its ethical justifiability, and discuss whether the impact on employees should be a core consideration in managerial decisions.

Initially, Danna Lumus’s decision to modify the sales forecast appears driven by her concern for employee welfare and a desire to influence management’s choice towards a more labor-intensive manual process, which would retain employment for her colleague Jerry and other workers. Her action reflects a form of ethical activism, advocating for employees’ interests by manipulating data to sway managerial decision-making in a direction favorable to current employees. From an ethical perspective, this demonstrates a utilitarian approach, aiming to maximize positive outcomes for employees at potential cost to the organization’s financial interests or accuracy of planning.

However, this decision raises questions about honesty and transparency, which are fundamental ethical principles in business practice. Altering forecasts to influence choices can be seen as a form of deception, eroding trust between the manager and the organization’s leadership. According to Kantian ethics, such manipulation could be considered unethical because it treats the decision-making process and organizational stakeholders as means to an end, rather than respecting their right to truthful information. Kantian ethics emphasize honesty and integrity as non-negotiable moral standards, suggesting that such alterations undermine ethical duties of truthfulness.

On the other hand, some argue that considering the impact of managerial decisions on employees is ethically justified, especially when the decisions affect livelihoods, job security, and workplace morale. The nature of business decisions includes ethical considerations that transcend pure profit maximization, often aligning with stakeholder theory, which advocates for balancing stakeholder interests in decision-making. From this perspective, Danna’s strategic decision to influence the forecast might be justified if it serves a moral obligation to safeguard employment and promote organizational stability. Empirical research supports the importance of considering employee welfare in strategic choices, emphasizing that fostering a motivated and secure workforce contributes to long-term organizational success (Alfes et al., 2013; Han et al., 2019).

Furthermore, the ethical debate hinges on whether it is inherently wrong to consider employee impacts in decision-making. Many organizational theorists argue that ethical leadership involves weighing multiple stakeholder interests, not solely shareholder profits. Decisions that promote employee retention can enhance company reputation, foster loyalty, and contribute positively to organizational culture—all aligned with ethical business practices. Conversely, neglecting the human impact may lead to detrimental organizational outcomes, reputation damage, and long-term ethical failings (Murphy et al., 2015; Sachs & Sachs, 2021). From this vantage point, Danna’s decision could be viewed as ethically justified if it genuinely aims to protect employee interests, provided it does not involve deception or breach of truthfulness.

In conclusion, while Danna Lumus’s decision to alter sales projections stems from a desire to promote employee welfare, ethical concerns arising from data manipulation challenge its moral standing. Transparency and honesty remain core ethical standards, and any compromise in these areas warrants scrutiny. Nevertheless, considering the impact of business decisions on employees aligns with broader ethical principles, such as stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility, which emphasize moral responsibilities toward all stakeholders, including employees. Managers should strive to balance truthfulness with compassion, ensuring that decisions uphold integrity while also fostering organizational and social well-being.

References

• Alfes, K., Truss, C., Soane, E. C., Rees, C., & Gatenby, M. (2013). The relationship between line manager behavior, perceived HRM practices, and individual performance: Examining the mediating role of engagement. Human Resource Management, 52(6), 839–859.
• Han, J. H., Kang, S., Oh, I. S., Kehoe, R. R., & Lepak, D. P. (2019). The goldilocks effect of strategic human resource management? Optimizing the benefits of a high-performance work system through the dual alignment of vertical and horizontal fit. Academy of Management Journal, 62(5), 1377–1399.
• Murphy, M., Arenas, D., & Batista, J. M. (2015). Value creation in cross-sector collaborations: The roles of experience and alignment. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), 861–877.
• Sachs, J. D., & Sachs, L. E. (2021). Business alignment for the "Decade of Action". Journal of International Business Policy, 4(2), 123–139.
• El-Masri, M., Orozco, J., Tarhini, A., & Tarhini, T. (2015). The impact of IS-business alignment practices on organizational choice of IS-business alignment strategies. PACIS Proceedings, 2015, 215.
• Althonayan, A., & Andronache, A. (2019). Resiliency under strategic foresight: The effects of cybersecurity management and enterprise risk management alignment. In 2019 International Conference on Cyber Situational Awareness, Data Analytics and Assessment (Cyber SA) (pp. 1–9). IEEE.
• El-Masri, M., Orozco, J., Tarhini, A., & Tarhini, T. (2015). The impact of IS-business alignment practices on organizational choice of IS-business alignment strategies. PACIS 2015 Proceedings, 215.
• Blackburn, R. A., Hart, M., & Wainwright, T. (2013). Small business performance: Business, strategy and owner-manager characteristics. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 20(1), 8-27.
• Additional scholarly sources relevant to business ethics and strategic management.