Question: In the second solution, your group mentions that the new manager would let Max still

work in the
company but in the different position. Can you clarify what this position is while Max is an assistant branch
manager and this position can be considered as the position closest to the branch manager and high
achievement?

In the first solution, your group said that “The company should invest in him, providing courses for him to
develop new skills, having the patience and spending time to train Max.”
=> I will argue in other ethical viewpoint for this action. From the utilitarianism side, it looks at this issue
differently. To benefit the interest of the community (Specifically the work department in this case), while
diminishing the cause of their pain, it would be proper and comfortable to remove the cause of their
discomfort. Max is the primary cause of discomfort in this situation. By keeping Max employed, he is
causing pain and disruption to his team members, thus reducing potential success and creating frustration.
This detail is mentioned in the case, “As mistakes continued, Max's subordinates began to take notice of
the mounting number of shortcomings which caused them to blatantly exercise insubordination. His
reputation quickly changed from that of being an expert to later being viewed as untrustworthy and barely
able to complete the duties of his position.” Even though profitable, Max's struggles negatively impacted
both the morale and success of the entire office.
So by continually investing company time and resources into an under-qualified employee, the manager in
this case would be doing the company and its shareholders a gross injustice. Your choice to keep Max
embraces moral myopia by prioritizing profit over other negative attributes of continued employment.
- Thence, utilitarianism would insist that Max's employment be ceased immediately and his presence be
removed for the ultimate benefit of the team. However, this decision rests in the ethical competency of the
manager his/herself as it varies by situation, means that if the manager wants to keep Max, the trust need
be reestablished. The manager will support Max in managing the work, but Max himself also has to quickly
change his work habits by embracing and performing to the new managerial vision.

In the second solution, your group said that the new manager would help Max to find the same position in
the others company.
=> Firstly, from an economic point of view, your solution will create a potential employee for a firm's
competitors, and this affects the interests of the whole company and the rest of the employees, breaks the
theory of utilitarianism. Because Max had been a long-time employee of his organization, he had given
over 15 years of service to this company, means that Max had a large amount of experience.
- Secondly, your group said that the new manager would let Max still work in the company but in the
different position. While Max was very happy in his current position as assistant branch manager due to his
efforts for more than decade, this position could be considered as the position closest to the branch
manager, represented high achievement and great advancement opportunities for Max. Then if the other
new position in current company is not appropriate to Max, it breaks the theory of justice. This would both
tarnish his reputation, and create the sentiment that he was a professional failure. In addition, he had
grown accustomed to his current salary, and even if a lesser position were to be made available, he would
not consider accepting a reduced salary, as it would have affected his current standard of living as well as
his family and social benefits (according to utilitarianism). And after spending over a decade in his previous
position, Max believed that he had earned the promotion for this current leadership position, and he did not
want to move backward in his career.