REYES, MICA ELLA S.

BSMA 201
OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT (TQM)

Task Performance - Prelim

CASE STUDY #1

Q1. Was the student's behavior wrong, and if yes, why?

Yes, what the student did was wrong and is considered cyberbullying. The
student publicly insulted her teacher on social media, without considering that it could
harm the teacher’s reputation and also hurt her feelings. Moreover, I’m assuming that
the student disclosed the teacher's name when she tweeted, which can harm the
teacher’s privacy.

Q2. what are the teacher's goals in this situation?

The teacher's goal was to probably give an example using what the student did
to her since it was mentioned that the teacher was teaching social media etiquette. Or, it
could be that the teacher wants to humiliate the student in front of her class to retaliate
for what the student did to her by confronting her in front of the class and demanding a
public apology.

Q3. How should the teacher have addressed the misbehavior?

The teacher should have addressed this misbehavior privately with the student
and the student's parents. This is way more professional than confronting the student in
front of the class.

Q4. Should the teacher have excused the student's action, or taken a different approach?

The teacher should not excuse the student's misbehavior towards her because, I
believe that, no one deserves to be disrespected, whether in person or online. But,
instead of doing what the teacher did in this circumstance, I would take a different
 approach. With the approach, I mentioned in the previous question; discussing the
misbehavior with the student and the student’s parents privately.

Q5. If the teacher's actions are wrong, why is that?

It is wrong because just like what the student did she acted based on her
emotions and as an adult, the teacher should know better than to talk about this kind of
matter in front of the class which should be discussed privately. The teacher also did not
consider that the student can be a target of bullying because the entire class will pick on
the student for what happened.

Q6. Is cyberbullying different from face-to-face bullying, and if yes, how?

Yes. Cyberbullying is done online in which the offender usually posts mean,
false, or negative, content to defame someone. While face-to-face bullying is done
physically or in person which cannot be done online.

Q7. How should teachers as a profession treat student misbehavior like this?

Talk to them in private and discuss the matter with an open and understanding
mind.

Q8. Should teachers have a standard that they should follow, or should they be allowed
to exercise their discretion?

Teachers should follow a standard. Having a standard ensures better

accountability in any kind of situation that they may encounter while they're on the school
premises.

CASE STUDY #2

Q1. Did the researcher have an obligation to return to the laboratory to repeat the
results? Why or why not?
 Yes, the researcher has an obligation to repeat the experiment. particularly if the
supervisor requested the redo. in order to prove that the experiment is indeed authentic.

Q2. The decision to retract the article was based on two factors: the absence of records
corroborating the researcher's results and the laboratory's inability to repeat the results.
Are those the right standards to use? Assume there were four authors on the paper,
including the researcher and the supervisor.

Yes, I believe those are the right standards to apply. If the research paper did not
meet those standards, it should be retracted since it may provide incorrect information
to individuals who read it. However, the authorities should have notified the researcher
about the retraction because her agreement is crucial to be able to retract the paper.

Q3. Should the supervisor and the other authors also share responsibility for the
retraction, and if yes on what basis?

Yes, they should be held accountable as well, especially the supervisor who let
the article to be published without verifying its authenticity. They could have prevented
harm to the researcher's career and the scientific community if they had examined the
article from the start and prevented its publication.

CASE STUDY #3

Q1. Would people normally be able to treat another person in this way? Why or why not?

I believe people would not normally be able to treat another person in this way.
Normally, people would feel guilty to do something like using someone else’s trust for
their own benefit, but for those people who are in this line of work, such as journalists,
this is probably normal. Because in order to expose a huge scandal they need to have
evidence that they can only obtain by gaining the trust of the people involved in the
scandal.
 Additionally, I believe that some journalists feel a sense of responsibility to
expose scandals which allows them to feel less guilty about their actions because, in
their minds, they are doing it for the sake of the people who suffer as a result of these
corruption scandals.

Q2. Why did the journalist do this?

The journalist did this in order to expose the corruption that has been going on
for years. If the journalist did not do this, they would not be able to obtain the necessary
evidence to expose the corruption. The journalist most likely did the same thing in order
to publish a good scoop that will benefit his/her career.

Q3. Do those reasons excuse or justify the way the journalist treated the employee?

In my opinion, yes. What the journalist did, although it is considered unethical,

was done for the benefit of the majority of the people. Without the journalist, the
corruption will most likely continue for much longer and will affect more people.

Q4. Should the employee have realized that talking to the journalist could result in the
corruption being exposed, and the employee being subject to criminal proceedings?

Yes. in my opinion, the employee is too naive to not realize that he/she is being
used by the journalist. The employee probably thought that the journalist is going to
exclude him/her from the scandal because the employee assumed they were friends
based on how the journalist treated him/her before exposing the scandal.

Q5. Has the employee been injured by the journalist's actions or the employee's actions,
such as the employee's failure to report the problem?

The employee has been injured by the employee’s action. The employees are
bound to be injured from the moment they become involved in corruption, and also
because of the employee's naivety that causes the corruption to be exposed.
 CASE STUDY #4

Q1. Has the patient acted wrongfully, and if yes, what exactly is wrongful?

Yes. the wrongful action is the patient's irresponsibility and selfishness. The
patient was irresponsible because he contaminated his partners through unprotected
sexual intercourse knowing that his disease can kill someone. And selfishness because
he is willing to lie to his partner in order to have sexual intercourse because he knows no
one will want to if he says he has HIV.

Q2. Assuming the doctor knows the identity of the partners because the patient told him,
should the doctor take any action toward the partners? If yes, what exactly should he or
she do?

It depends if the patient consented to the doctor to take action towards his
partners but if not then the doctor can't do anything about it, because it's the doctor's
responsibility to keep the information of the patient confidential.

Q3. What if the patient objects and wants to keep the information confidential?

Then the doctor should keep it confidential.

Q4. Do the patient's wrongful actions mean that the patient should no longer have a
claim to confidentiality?

No, the patient's wrongful action does not invalidate the patient's right to
confidentiality. It is crucial to keep in mind that the healthcare provider has a
responsibility to protect patient privacy and should only disclose information when
mandated by law.

Q5. If the doctor contacts the partners over the patient's objections,
should the patient complain about the doctor widely online, so other patients know what
the doctor might do?
 The patient shouldn't complain online. I think the best thing to do is to report it to
the authorities and the authorities would probably suspend the doctor's license for
contacting the partners over the patient's objection.

Q6. What guidance can you formulate that could be offered to the doctor to help him or
her resolve the problem?

Treat the patient normally and educate him about his disease and how
dangerous it is to have sexual intercourse without protection.