BECSR ASSIGNMENT

CASE ANALYSIS:
YOUR STAR SALES PERSON LIED: SHOULD HE
GET A SECOND CHANCE?

BY-
VIRESH GUPTA (19202065)
Q1) The context, is there any ethical issue? If so, what is the ethical dilemma?

Ethical Issue

An ethical breach- Uday intentionally falsifying some information about his customer calls.

Ethical Dilemma

 Sack Uday from the organization for the ethical breach committed.
 Give him another chance, taking in account he being the best sales representative of the
firm.

Q2) How to go about in resolving the ethical dilemma?

To resolve the ethical dilemma, we have to connect the four ethical spheres of an organization
with the five ethical approaches-

First, as an individual we will look at Siddhant’s Virtues, who is the CEO of the organization and
will be taking the decision. Siddhant should follow his own virtues of honesty and integrity with
every employee and every customer. Siddhants virtue has brought Novacib to great heights. So
laying off Uday will prove Siddhants value to his virtues and prove the value of his virtues in the
organization

Second, as an economic agent Siddhant must think about the profitability of the firm, which can
be empathized by the Utilitarian Approach. Uday has been a top performer for the firm by
achieving huge sales targets consistently. He has with his efforts brought a lot of business for his
firm. Siddhant with help of Uday have taken Novacib to be the market leader in the
pharmaceutical industry. So laying off such an asset of the firm will hamper the firm a lot. The
choice of giving Uday a second chance has a greater good for the organization than laying him
off for just maintaining the ethical code of conduct.

Third, as a leader, Siddhant should follow the Rights Approach. The rights approach gives
everyone equal rights. Under Siddhants leadership all the sales representatives have been trained
with ethics being the dominant facet of their training. Hence it is important for Siddhant to
maintain the same ethical code and not make an exception with Uday.

Fourth, for making a decision outside the boundary of the organization, Common Good approach
is followed. Novacib being a profitable organization is also answerable to its shareholders
outside the firm. Common good approach signifies making decisions to benefit everyone part of
the organization. Novacib is highly valued through its high moral standards. It has been very
genuine in providing medicines to its customers. Novacib being a market leader, with its strong
virtue of honesty and integrity, can give benefits to its shareholders a lot. So it is important to
retain employees like Uday who can help Novacib be the market leader in the industry.
Q3) Possible solutions……

 Solution 1- Let him go

Siddhant being a man of principles has organized the values of integrity and honesty
since the date of his joining in the organization. Every member of the firm has the right to
be treated equally. If Uday was to be given a second chance for the ethical breach
committed of falsifying the sales report to meet the sales target, it will hamper the
organizations culture and create a atmosphere of unjust on the members of the
organization. Letting him go will also create a sense of fear in the mind of other
members, which will stop them from doing any wrong doings to achieve the goals of the
organization.

 Solution 2- Issue a warning

Uday has been a top performer for the organization. He has generated on an average
$2,50,000 revenue a year and had built strong customer relationships that Novacib stood to
lose if they sacked him. He has been a guide for many other sales representatives. So it is
difficult to let off such a valuable asset for the organization. It can be also easy for Uday
to switch companies, which can be risky for Novacib as it will take away all the
customers which Uday had created for Novacib. So issuing a warning with some
monetary penalty can help the company economically foregoing its ethical aspect though.