Part 1
Ethical Decision-Making Analysis Using Fisher’s Model
Introduction
This research paper will examine the real workplace situation by using Fisher’s nine-step ethical decision-making model. To describe this model, it will use Oliver and Hioco’s model. A few years ago, I worked in an organization. There, I saw a situation where our supervisor, named Shin, had to decide to change an employee’s performance review. One worker named Kara went through a sudden family problem. Her personal problem felt a huge impact on her working performance. Our company's HR policy states that a worker's performance is based on working productivity. Hence, Kara faced some problems, but our supervisors allowed her some flexibility. In the following section, nine key questions from the model are described, which help to examine how the ethical decision was made in this case.
- What is the Issue?
The main problem was whether Shin should change Kara’s performance review to consider her personal situation. In this case, Shin had a difficult time deciding between sticking to the strict rules of the company or giving her some flexibility. She understood that Kara’s family issues caused a short-term drop in her work performance.
- Why is a decision needed?
Shin's decision was necessary in this case as a supervisor of our company. Kara's performance review determines her eligibility for a potential promotion in her responsibilities. Delaying or avoiding the decision was not possible for Shin. The performance review needs to be submitted to HR by a fixed deadline. The decision also carried long-term implications for fairness and trust within the team.
- What are the alternatives?
In this case, two possible alternatives are:
Alternative A: Shin maintains the original evaluation, which is strictly based on employees’ performance metrics.
Alternative B: Shin adjusts the evaluation to reflect Kara’s performance metrics before her crisis.
- What are the potential consequences of each alternative?
Alternative A: maintaining rating
Positive | It is ensured that HR policy is applied the same way every time for each employee. It prevents setting a bad example so that any employee can benefit from the company rule. The evaluation is based on the employee’s performance. |
Negative | It might create an uncaring behavior in employees. It could damage an employee's trust in his or her organization. Employees share fewer of their personal problems. |
Put your paper in expert hands
Get a custom essay written to your exact requirements — researched, structured, and delivered on time.
Write my essay →Alternative B: Adjust rating
Positive | It shows understanding between the employees and supervisors. It helps to build a caring work environment. It acknowledges situations that are outside Kara’s control. |
Nagative | It might make other workers think there’s unfair treatment; it could lead others to ask for special treatment. |
- How likely or unlikely and how valuable or adverse are the consequences?
The negative effects of Alternative A were probably going to be serious. It has been noticed that Alternative A creates a situation where employees are not being treated with kindness (Oliver & Hioco, 2012). The positive results of Alternative B help to build trust among the employees and the management team. It also improves the performance of the team. The other worker in this case thought Kara was getting special treatment from the management. It was not true; her performance was very good before her crisis.
- Does each alternative comply with laws, policies, and standards of conduct?
Both options followed the company’s policies. The guidelines did not stop people from using their judgment in context. Alternative A followed the company’s written rules more closely. Alternative B matched with the organization’s goals, which highlight treating all employees with fairness and kindness, which are part of its mission.
- What are the ethical considerations in each alternative?
According to Oliver & Hioco (2012), ethical tests for each alternative:
Ethical tests | Response: Yes/No and explanation |
| Alternative A: No, if Shin were in Kara’s position, she would not want to be punished for a temporary crisis that was outside her control (Oliver & Hioco, 2012). Alternative B: Yes, this reflects kindness. Most people would want their context understood during a difficult personal situation. |
| Alternative A: No, if all supervisors ignored the situation, it could create an unsupportive environment and reduce trust in leadership. Alternative B: Yes, if all supervisors fairly considered documented exceptional circumstances, it would promote a consistent culture. |
| Alternative A: Partially No, it is honest, but it lacks fairness. Alternative B: Yes, adjusting the evaluation aligns with integrity and fairness, that helps to make a justified exception. |
| Alternative A: No, it harms Kara’s morale and possibly the overall team’s trust. Alternative B: Yes, it supports Kara, encourages team morale, and does not specifically harm organizational outcomes. |
| Alternative A: Yes, it marginalizes employees facing crises. Alternative B: No, it prevents unfair disadvantage by acknowledging Kara’s temporary struggle and ensuring equal opportunity. |
| Alternative A: No, it ignores the emotional and relational aspects of Kara’s situation and focuses only on numbers (Oliver & Hioco, 2012). Alternative B: Yes, it recognizes Kara’s personal crisis, maintains a supportive relationship, and fulfills Shin’s responsibility to care for her team. |
- What is the decision?
I have noticed that Shin chose Alternative B and adjusted Kara’s performance evaluation. She documented the reason clearly for the low performance of Kara. Shin highlighted Kara’s previous performance. She also consulted with our management team to ensure transparency and consistency.
- Was the decision effective?
Shin’s decision was effective. Team performance improved. Kara’s performance returned to its high standard after her crisis. HR reported no complaints of unfairness. The outcome demonstrated that applying ethical logic supported both individual well-being and organizational stability.
Conclusion
This entire analysis showed that Fisher's model provides a clear way to handle difficult situations at work. By examining different choices and their effects, the supervisor made a decision that considered both the rules of the company and the workers' situation. This method helps to understand the problem better. It provides an ethically right solution for both the company and employees.
Part 2
Offload drafts to a field expert
Our writers can refine your work for better clarity, flow, and higher originality in 3+ hours.
Match with writer →Introduction
In my workplace, I faced an ethical problem with a colleague named Lola. Our team depends on a correct monthly report. Management uses it to check our team's productivity and plan for the future. One time, I saw that Lola made a big mistake in her report, which could make our team’s performance look worse. Our team's performance was good. I talked to her privately, and she got worried and asked me not to tell our boss. She said she would fix the mistake on her own before anyone found out. The fix needed approval from our company’s supervisor. If I did not say something, the wrong information might go up. According to Johnson (2011), the 12-question framework examines how I went through the process of making an ethical decision.
What are the ethical issues or problems?
The ethical problem focuses on whether I should report the mistake to my supervisor to ensure the accuracy of our performance. I think it is better to remain silent to protect Lola from possible corrective action. The conflict involves my honesty and loyalty to my work.
What are the facts?
The facts are clear:
- Lola made a reporting error in our team performance.
- She is already on a performance improvement plan.
- Her mistake will affect our department’s working performance.
- Correcting the mistake requires supervisor involvement.
- The report is due within 24 hours.
These facts indicate that the error cannot be corrected privately without violating procedures.
Who are the stakeholders?
Lola, who made the mistake and also feared the punishing outcomes. I was also involved because I observed Lola’s mistake, and for me, it is important to prioritize ethical work. Our supervisor always depends on accurate reporting. Our management team judges unfairly by seeing Lola's inaccurate data. I have noticed our company always depends on authentic reporting for making any operational decision.
What are the options?
Opinion A: For me, the first option was to remain silent and allow Lola to fix her mistake by herself.
Opinion B: For me, the second option was to inform my supervisor about Lola's mistake so it can be corrected properly.
What are the consequences of each option?
Option A: Stay silent | |
Positive |
|
Negative |
|
Option B: Report the mistake | |
Positive |
|
Negative |
|
What duties or obligations are involved?
I have a responsibility to my organization to always follow honesty and transparency in my work. I always follow reporting protocols and support our team's accuracy. I would maintain my professionalism in an uncomfortable situation also.
What ethical principles apply?
I always follow honesty; for my organization, accurate reporting is essential. Justice is very important. Our department should not be misrepresented by one's mistake. In the organization, all workers' responsibilities are very important. Mistakes should not be hidden. In the organization, care Ethics is important. Lola's mistake should be handled with care.
What professional standards or policies apply?
Our company policy requires immediate reporting of any mistakes. For any data correction, it is essential to obtain approval from our supervisor. It is essential to always submit correct data to the higher authority; any silence about the mistake would break this policy.
How would I feel if my decision were revealed publicly?
If I stayed silent to avoid knowing Lola’s mistake, I would be embarrassed and feel guilty for not taking the correct step to understand the situation. If I reported to my supervisor about the mistake, I could defend the decision confidently. It is aligned with policy and organizational ethics.
What would a wise, mature person with strong moral character do?
A wise leader would prioritize honesty. They would report the mistake as well as show care toward Lola. The leader also supports her in learning from her mistakes.
What can be done to minimize negative consequences?
To reduce the problem, for Lola, I could inform her before speaking to my management team. I will create a report as a teamwork issue rather than blaming her. I encourage her professional development.
What is the best decision overall?
For me, the best division was Option B: I reported Lola’s mistake to my supervisor.
My responsibility in my organization is to always support honesty and transparent work ethics. In difficult situations, I encourage my teammates to always make ethical decisions.
Conclusion
For this case, I used Johnson’s 12 Question framework to make an ethical decision. Hence, I reported Lola’s mistake to our supervisor, it felt a negative impact on our bonding. If I stayed, I would compromise with accuracy. The analysis demonstrates that ethical leadership requires difficult but principled decisions. Honesty is essential to maintaining an effective workplace environment.
Reference List
Johnson, C. E. (2011). Meeting the Ethical Challenges of Leadership: Casting Light Or Shadow. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications (4th ed.).
Oliver, D. E., & Hioco, B. (2012). An ethical decision-making framework for community college administrators. Community College Review, 40(3), 240-254.https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552112445611