The Manager's Dilemma: Imagine You Are A Manager In A Compan

Themanagersdilemmaimagineyouareamanagerinacompanythatisi

The manager’s dilemma: Imagine you are a manager in a company that is in a difficult financial situation. If your customers learn about the company’s difficulties, many of them will cancel their orders. Without these orders, you will have to lay off 500 employees, which is 30% of the workforce, within one year. However, if the market improves, the company might overcome its current challenges. The accounting firm auditing your company has indirectly suggested that they could “decorate” the financial figures to give the company some time, but there is no guarantee of future improvement since economic conditions are difficult.

The critical ethical question is whether you should try to preserve your employees’ jobs by keeping important information about the company's financial health secret from customers, even though they have a right to know the true financial state of the company. This situation raises important considerations regarding honesty, trust, and the ethical responsibilities of a manager.

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemma faced by managers in financially distressed companies exemplifies the complex balance between honesty, stakeholder interests, and the pursuit of organizational survival. On one hand, disclosure of the true financial situation aligns with principles of transparency and respect for stakeholder rights. On the other, concealing information might preserve jobs and stakeholder stability in the short term, but risks long-term damage to trust and integrity.

From a utilitarian perspective, the decision hinges on outcomes and consequences. Utilitarianism suggests that the morally correct choice is the one that maximizes overall happiness and minimizes suffering. In this context, a utilitarian might argue that hiding the company's financial difficulties could result in more benefits—such as saving jobs for the current employees, maintaining market stability, and avoiding immediate economic hardship—if the indication of false financial health leads to continued business operations. Conversely, if the eventual revelation of dishonesty causes significant loss of trust, long-term damage, or legal consequences, then the overall happiness would decrease, and transparency might be preferable.

Kantian ethics, rooted in the ideas of Immanuel Kant, emphasize duty, honesty, and treating individuals as ends rather than means. From this perspective, deception or concealment is inherently wrong because it violates the moral obligation to tell the truth. Kantian ethics would argue that even in hard times, managers have a duty to be honest with their stakeholders, including customers, employees, and shareholders. Deceiving customers about the financial health of the company would undermine trust and violate the moral principle of honesty, regardless of the potential benefits.

Jeffrey Swartz, the former CEO of Timberland, discussed the importance of doing well by doing good, emphasizing that ethical considerations are integral to business success. Swartz would likely lean toward a Kantian position—prioritizing honesty and moral integrity—because Timberland’s corporate values centered around trustworthiness and social responsibility. Swartz believed that trust and authenticity are vital for long-term success, suggesting he would oppose deceptive practices, even if they temporarily shield the company from difficulties.

For a business leader like Swartz, honesty likely constitutes a fundamental value. He would argue that maintaining trustworthiness is critical because it sustains relationships with customers and other stakeholders over the long term. Deception, while potentially offering short-term advantages, risks eroding trust, damaging reputation, and undermining stakeholder confidence, all of which are detrimental to sustainable success.

The question of whose interests should predominate—the employees, customers, or shareholders—is central to this ethical dilemma. Each group’s interests must be weighed carefully. Employees rely on the company’s stability and honesty for job security and dignity. Customers depend on truthful information to make informed decisions. Shareholders seek profitability but also have an interest in maintaining the company’s reputation and integrity.

In this scenario, trustworthiness should ultimately take precedence over immediate utility, as once lost, trust is difficult to regain and essential for long-term business viability. Integrity and honesty foster sustainable relationships, reduce risks associated with deception, and uphold the moral fabric of corporate governance. While utility—maximizing overall benefit—can be persuasive in certain contexts, it should not override fundamental ethical principles of honesty and respect for stakeholder rights.

In conclusion, ethical decision-making in business demands balancing outcomes with moral duties. A stakeholder-oriented perspective emphasizes that honesty and trustworthiness are vital for sustainable success. Managers must consider the long-term implications of their actions, recognizing that preserving integrity ultimately benefits all stakeholders more than short-term gains achieved through deception. Corporate leaders like Swartz exemplify this approach, illustrating that doing “well and doing good” aligns profitability with moral responsibility, fostering a resilient and trustworthy corporate culture.

References

1. Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford University Press.
2. Friedman, M. (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. The New York Times Magazine.
3. Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. (H. J. Paton, Trans.). Harper & Row, 1964.
4. Neill, J. (2002). A Kantian Approach to Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(1), 1–21.
5. Solomon, R. C. (1992). Ethics and Excellence: Cooperation and Integrity in Business. Oxford University Press.
6. Swartz, J. (2008). Doing Well and Doing Good: The Moral Foundations of Ethical Business Practice. Harvard Business Review.
7. Vogel, D. (2010). The Private Regimes of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward a Framework and Empirical Evidence. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2), 275–299.
8. Werhane, P. H., & Freeman, R. E. (2000). Business Ethics: The State of the Art. Business and Society, 39(4), 347–373.
9. Werhane, P. H. (2012). Moral Imagination and Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4), 729–750.
10. Williams, R. (2014). Ethical Business Practice: Principles and Applications. Routledge.