BUSINESS ETHICS: CASE

STUDY
 STATEMENT OF THE STUDY
• GIVEN WITH THE NOTICE OF DR. MEHRA’S TERMINATION
FROM THE HOSPITAL AND THE ROUTINE ENQUIRY OF HIS
INVOLVEMENT WHICH HE NEGLECTED, BLAMING THE
HOSPITAL FOR IT, WHAT ACTION MUST THE HOSPITAL DO
IN ORDER TO COUNTERFEIT THE ACCUSATIONS OF THE
TERMINATED DOCTOR IN THE HOSPITAL? HOW WOULD
THE HR PROVE THAT THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH AND
THE PERSON IN QUESTION WAS ONLY USING THE
HOSPITAL AS A SCAPEGOAT OF HIS OWN INVOLVEMENT
 OBJECTIVES
• TO BE ABLE TO CREATE A RESPONSE TO CONTRADICTS DR.
MERHA’S ALLEGATIONS TOWARDS THE HOSPITAL.
• TO BE ABLE TO PROVE THE HOSPITAL’S INNOCENCE
AGAINST THE SAID NOTION.
• TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE AN ACTION PLAN IN RELATIVE
TO THE RECOMMENDATION.
 SWOT AND SWOT ANALYSIS
Strengths Weakness
 Award Winning Hospital  High ethical standards
 Strict Code of Conduct  
 Reputed hospital
Opportunity Threats
 Known in the Business Industry  Police
 Rich Businessmen  Doctor Mehra’s allegations
 Doctor Mehra’s alleged connections with the
mafias
 
• STRENGTHS
AWARD WINNING HOSPITAL
- THE HOSPITAL HAS WON A LOT OF AWARDS FOR BEING A REPUTABLE MEDICAL
CENTER AND IS KNOWN FOR HAVING HIGH STANDARDS OF EMPLOYEE ETHICAL
BEHAVIOR. BECAUSE OF THIS IT CAN HELP THE HOSPITAL PROLONG IN THE
MEDICAL INDUSTRY. THE HOSPITAL IS A RECIPIENT OF MANY AWARDS LIKE “BEST
HOSPITAL TO WORK FOR”.
STRICT CODE OF CONDUCT
- THE HOSPITAL ONLY HIRES EMPLOYEES WHO HAVE CLEAN REPUTATION AND
HAVE GOOD ETHICAL BEHAVIOR. IT HAD SET HIGH STANDARDS OF EMPLOYEE
ETHICAL BEHAVIOR AND IT WAS KNOWN TO FOLLOW ITS ETHICAL CODE OF
CONDUCT “IN TOTO”.
REPUTED HOSPITAL
- BASED ON THE DESCRIPTION, THE HOSPITAL IS A WELL KNOWN
ESTABLISHMENT WITH HIGHLY SKILLED DOCTORS.
• WEAKNESS
HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS
- BECAUSE OF THE HOSPITALS HIGH ETHICAL STANDARDS, ONLY FEW EMPLOYEES
ARE ELIGIBLE TO ATTAIN A POSITION INSIDE THE HOSPITAL.

• OPPURTUNITIES
KNOWN IN THE BUSINESS INDUSTRY
- ONE OF THE OPPURTUNITIES OF THE HOSPITAL IS THAT IT IS WELL KNOWN. SINCE
THE HOSPITAL ARE POPULAR IN THE INDUSTRY, A LOT OF PATIENT TRUST THE HOSPITAL.
• RICH BUSINESSMAN
- SINCE THE HOSPITAL IS ONE OF THE REPUTABLE MEDICAL SOURCE IN THE
COMMUNITY AND IS WIDELY KNOWN IN THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY, THEY GET PATIENTS
WHO ARE RICH BUSINESSMEN.
• THREATS
DOCTOR MEHRA’S ALLEGED CONNECTION WITH THE MAFIA
- IT IS SAID THAT DR. MEHRA RECEIVED SOME MEDIA ATTENTION BECAUSE HE WAS
CALLED BY THE DSP INQUIRING ABOUT A DINNER HE HAD TAKEN WITH ONE OF THE
WANTED MAFIAS.
DOCTOR MEHRA’S ALLEGATION
- THE ATTENTIONS THAT DR. MEHRA MADE IN THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA MAY CAUSE
A DEGRATION IN THE HOSPITAL SIDE. HE CAUSED A RUCKUS BASE ON HIS
ACCUSATIONS TOWARDS THE HOSPITAL FOR THE FAULT OF HIS OWN. AS A RESULT, IT
WOULD CAUSE A DISTRAIN IN THE WORKPLACE OR THE HOSPITAL’S NAME ITSELF.
POLICE
- THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE POLICE MAY CAUSE A STRAIN IN THE HOSPITAL’S
REPUTATION.
 AREAS OF CONSIDERATION

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE AREAS THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE CASE STUDY
ANALYSIS:
• DR. MEHRA’S ALLEGED INVOLEMENT TOWARDS THE MAFIA.
THE INVOLVEMENT OF DR. MEHRA IN THE SAID ISSUE WILL SERVE AS KEY FACTOR
ON PROVING THAT THE HOSPITAL IS NOT INVOLVE TO THE CASE
• THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN THE HOSPITAL.
THE REASON WHY THE DOCTOR IN QUESTION WAS FIRED FROM HIS POSITION IN
THE HOSPITAL IS BECAUSE OF HIS NEGLIGENCE OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT.
PARTICULARLY, HE FAILED TO DISCLOSE HIS APPLICATION FORM TO THE HOSPITAL
THAT HE USED TO SERVE A COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AS A PART TIME ALONG WITH HIS
STUDIES AS A STUDENT.
• THE HOSPITALS REPUTATION.
THE HOSPITAL IS A WELL REPUTED ENSTABLISHMENT. IT RECEIVED
NUMEROUS AWARDS IN THE PAST AS WELL AS TO GET MANY RICH BUSINESS
MEN WHO PATRONIZE THEM AND RECIEVING DONATION FROM MANY
QUARTERS AROUND THE WORLD. THE REASON WHY IT SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED IS BECAUSE THE REPUTATION IS AN IMPORTANT FOR THE
HOSPITAL TO MENTAIN ITS GOOD STANDING ACROSS THE WORLD, AND IF
DISTRAIN, IT MAY CAUSE SERIOUS ISSUES REGARDING TO THE INVESTORS
AND MAY AFFECT THE TRUST QUALITY OF THE HOSPITAL, RESULTING IN A
DIRE STRAIT SITUATION TO THE COMPANY.
 ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION
1. CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATORY SEMINAR TO THE EMPLOYEES, SO THAT THE COMPANY CAN
REASSURE THAT THE ISSUE REGARDING DR. MEHRA’S COMPLAIN WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.

• PROS: IT WOULD MAKE THE EMPLOYEES AWARE OF THEIR ACTIONS AND CONDUCTIVITY.

• CONS: MONEY AND TIME CONSUMING.

2. ARRANGE A MEETING WITH DR. MEHRA. TO CLARIFY THE CONFUSION BETWEEN THE TWO
SIDES AND TRY AND CONVINCE HIM TO WITHDRAW HIS TESTIMONY AGAINST THE HOSPITAL.

• PROS: IT MAY COOL THE SITUATION BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES AND MIGHT END THE
CONTROVERSY OF THE HOSPITAL.

• CONS: IT MAY WORSEN THE ISSUE.

3. ADJUST THE HOSPITALS CODE OF CONDUCT. IN THIS WAY, THE EMPLOYEES MAY HAVE A LITTLE BIT
OF FREEDOM AND THE EMPLOYEES WON’T BE STRANGLED BY THE HOSPITALS RULES AND ETHICS.

• PROS: THE WORKPLACE WOULD BE LOOSENING UP ITS STANDARDS, RESULTING INTO A

FRIENDLIER ENVIRONMENT INSIDE WORKPLACE.

• CONS: THE EMPLOYEES MIGHT ABUSE THIS ADJUSTMENT RESULTING TO A LAGER CONFLICT IN THE
FUTURE.

4. RELEASE A PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING TO THE CONTROVERSY. IN THIS WAY THE

HOSPITAL WOULD BE ABLE TO CONTRADICT THE ACCUSATION MADE BY DR. MEHRA AND TO
PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE.

• PROS: THE HOSPITAL WOULD BE ABLE TO DEFEND THEIR REPUTATION AGAINST THE
SAID ISSUE BY RELEASING THEIR STATEMENT TO THE PUBLIC FOR CLARIFICATIONS.

• CONS: IT EXPENSIVE AND TIME CONSUMING.