The Problem Is That One Of The Athletes Who Has A

The Problemthe Problem Is That One Of The Athletes Who Has a Huge Fan

The problem: The problem is that one of the athletes who has a huge fan following and whom the client wants to be a part of the promotional program has been investigated to be taking steroids. Amalia has a very strong gut feeling that the candidate whom the client insists upon is a regular drug taker and should not be allowed to feature in the promotional programs. Amalia has even asked the agent of the candidate if a steroid test can be undertaken by the candidate. The agent commented on an emphatic no which all the more made Amalia certain that this candidate was taking drugs. The client wants this particular candidate prominently featured.

Amalia has already spoken to her team and they feel that if this candidate is not taken the client would be unhappy and they might lose the client. There could also be a time when Amalia’s decision of seeking out the problem could be over ridden by the team manager. Hence Amalia requires the advice of Kelly on this matter. Kelly’s understanding Kelly wants to know the basis of Amalia’s suspicion? Kelly would also like to know if Amalia has some evidence or proof about the star candidate taking steroids.

Kelly would also like to know why the team members with whom Amalia has conferred are not taking sides with Amalia? Can the client be faced with these facts? Amalie’s Questions? Can Amalie confront the team with her discoveries? Can she look at the ways on which she can talk to her team and with the client?

What is her role in this discovery? To what extent can she be supported in this decision making? Best leadership approach: Kelly has to use the situational leadership forces to ensure that she leads the team proactively towards the promotional program without angering the client and subtly telling the client that the star candidate uses steroids and hence cannot be featured prominently. Kelly needs to be very subtle and handle the client and the team in a very transformational manner. At the given situation for Kelly it is very important to take the appropriate decision regarding the supplying of the resource to the energy drink client.

Because it is very crucial for both the client as well as the organization. The client is not going to take the test of the applicant so it is Kelly and her team’s responsibility to evaluate the best possible resources and reduce all associated factors. So for Kelly it is very important to leverage the great decision power regarding the client. Proscout Mission Statement: “We scout talent for tomorrow’s work. We are a focused team of professionals committed to finding the best qualified candidates for our clients. Job candidates are screened for the highest ethics, talent, skills, and abilities. We stand behind our efforts and candidates at the time of hire or we will not charge our clients a fee if the candidates are not acceptable.”

In this case, the star candidate who has to be featured is suspected of being a steroid taker, which goes against the principles of sports ethics. The firm would be going against its mission statement if it hires this candidate for its promotional program. Conflict resolution: There could be a conflict between the client and Proscout if the firm decides to stick to its mission and not feature the candidate. They might even lose the client.

So Kelly has to use her powers of persuasion to ensure that she communicates to the client about this candidate and explains how the firm will uphold its ethical principles of hiring without deviation. Communication process: If Amalia does not hear back from Kelly in time, she will need to escalate the matter to the ethics officer, senior manager, or the accounts manager to delay the hiring process sufficiently until Kelly can intervene and prevent committing to any shooting or hiring schedules.

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presents a complex ethical dilemma faced by professionals in talent management and marketing, emphasizing the importance of integrity, leadership, and effective communication in organizational decision-making. At its core, the issue revolves around the suspicion that a highly favored athlete, integral to a promotional campaign, is involved in steroid use, which directly conflicts with sports ethics and the company's commitment to ethical practices. Navigating this situation requires sensitive leadership, thorough assessment, and balancing stakeholder interests, including client expectations, organizational principles, and ethical standards.

Amalia's suspicion about the athlete's steroid use is rooted in her intuition and the refusal of the athlete's agent to undergo testing. Ethically, this raises questions about the reliability of indirect evidence and the importance of conducting formal testing before making definitive decisions. Amalia must evaluate whether her gut feeling, coupled with the agent's refusal, constitutes sufficient grounds to act or if further investigation is necessary. The absence of concrete evidence complicates her position, but her moral obligation to uphold integrity suggests that she should advocate for an objective evaluation, such as a drug test, despite potential pushback from the client or team members.

Furthermore, Kelly’s role as a leader becomes critical in this scenario. Kelly needs to assess the reasoning behind Amalia's suspicion and whether there is any tangible proof of drug use. Her understanding of the situation allows her to guide the team through a situational leadership approach that emphasizes transparency, ethical standards, and strategic communication. Kelly must balance assertiveness with diplomacy, ensuring that the message about the athlete's possible doping is conveyed internally before addressing the client. Her leadership should foster a culture of integrity, encouraging team members to prioritize ethical standards over purely commercial interests.

One challenge Kelly faces is the potential conflict between organizational ethics and client demands. The client’s insistence on featuring the athlete, despite suspicions, presents a dilemma where commercial interests threaten to override ethical considerations. Kelly must leverage her decision-making authority to uphold the company's mission, which emphasizes ethical recruitment and the promotion of integrity. This entails effective use of transformational leadership traits—such as inspiring trust, motivating ethical behavior, and communicating vision—to persuade the client of the importance of adhering to ethical standards. Kelly’s ability to subtly frame the issue—highlighting long-term reputation over short-term gains—can help in aligning client expectations with organizational principles.

From a strategic perspective, Kelly should employ persuasive communication, emphasizing that featuring a suspected doping athlete could damage the company's credibility and violate ethical norms. She might propose alternative solutions, such as selecting other candidates or delaying the campaign until clear proof is obtained. If Kelly cannot resolve the issue promptly, escalation to higher authorities—like the ethics officer or senior management—becomes necessary. This ensures that the matter is handled with the seriousness it deserves without forcing immediate decision-making under pressure.

Additionally, the concept of Proscout’s mission statement guides the decision-making process. Since the organization prides itself on ethical standards and screening candidates for integrity, Kelly must reinforce this principle internally and externally. The potential inclusion of a drug-using athlete directly contradicts the company's mission, risking reputation damage and potential legal repercussions. Thus, Kelly’s leadership must be rooted in unwavering commitment to ethics, leadership by example, and transparent communication.

In conclusion, effective leadership in such ethical dilemmas involves evaluating evidence critically, advocating for integrity, and communicating transparently. Kelly’s role entails not just decision-making but also influencing stakeholders to prioritize long-term organizational values over immediate commercial benefits. The scenario underscores the importance of ethical leadership, strategic communication, and the courage to uphold principles that sustain organizational credibility and societal trust in an increasingly scrutinized sports and entertainment industry.

References

• Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.
• Covey, S. R. (2004). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Free Press.
• Fritzsche, D. J., & Koenig, H. F. (2004). Moral standards and moral judgments: An examination of the ethical reasoning of organizational managers. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(1), 97-120.
• Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315-327.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). How Good People Make Tough Choices. HarperOne.
• Patel, C., & Taylor, G. (2008). Ethics in sports marketing and management. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 9(2), 144-157.
• Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Neubaum, D. O. (2005). The Effect of Leader Ethical Disposition on Ethical Climate and Employee Attitudes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 135-151.
• Vogel, D. J. (2010). The corporate social responsibility and ethics debate. California Management Review, 52(2), 6-18.
• Xu, Y., & Rojas, F. (2015). Ethical dilemmas in talent management: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(4), 829-842.
• Yoon, K., & Kim, W. (2016). Leadership and ethics in sports marketing. Journal of Sports Management, 30(2), 123-134.