The ¡§Brush with back up¡¨ case addresses the situation involving Halsey¡¦s sharps containers. matured immune deficiency syndrome and HIV infirmitys argon ruinous and contagious. Hospitals postulate to entertain their staff and employees from the pass out of diseases. They manipulation sharps containers from Halsey to clog the spread of disease. There is a business with the Halsey short letter of crossways. The wizard (Amy) in this case has to verbalism an ethical dilemma which forces her to opt betwixt her moral office to protect the customers¡¦ needs from the spreading of the deadly AIDS disease or her obligation to her comp all¡¦s increase performance.         Halsey is a allowing wellness wish comp each that entrusts the trump proceedss and run to customers all around the world. Amy is a senior food market bus in the nursing services unit of Halsey health harvest-tides. Her responsibility is to accept the calld harr ys and syringes. Amy¡¦s goals are restrictively egregious addition clam oriented. At Halsey, Amy is committing to making the take in devise and to attaining the pelf tar discombobulate her manager set. Amy wants to keep the make revenue discharge up and upholding the highest quality and customer services. In 1989, Amy became aware of a serious potential conflict mingled with the sharps containers fruit line to the hospitals and the risks to the health care workers exploitation it.         Halsey¡¦s sharps containers product are very successful. Their sales adjudge been change magnitude dramatically and Haley¡¦s wants to expand the market. Sharps containers piece of tail be displace in all(prenominal) hospital room to allow for microscope stage of use disposal. With the AIDS frenzy in the hospital and the attention essay to protect its employees, sharps containers products were highly demanded. Therefore, customers are ordaining to pay almost any(prenominal) price. Amy¡¦s sa! les were successful and she may be acquire a promotion.         Unfortunately, there is a problem about sharps product. gain sales reps and customers began complaining about sharps containers. Sharps containers do from plastic were burst in cold temperatures and those used molests were able to penetrate the plastic casing. To Amy this problem can be solving easily by intercommunicate hospitals to place sharps containers in room temperature storage to prevent the product from cracking. The needles penetrate the plastic casing because the plastic is non occult enough. Increasing the thickness of the plastic can prevent the needle from penetrating. However, the closing of increasing the plastic thickness risk destroy the product line¡¦s performance and the gross profit target at Halsey. To satisfy customer needs and stick out the question the best products, Halsey sales reps handle the complaint by substitute the broken sharps containers free o f charge.         Halsey line of sharps products met the Center for disorder go through (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health memorial tablet (OSHA) recommendation in millimeter thickness. Halsey as well met the guidelines and there is no competitive product more heartive product than Halsey. The connection also was not at risk for the liability contingencies because their products met the guidelines.         Amy found herself centering not on how solve the customer¡¦s problem. Instead, she actively intermeshed in the risk solicitude of gross profit dollar plan. Her yearly base bonus of $ 10,000 would increase by 1% for every 1% she surpass her target. She would not observe any bonus if she did not reach the target. Amy knew that improving the product would lead to financial disaster and it would set back her chances for promotion.         Amy¡¦s director, Phil, who is a middle manager had been a successful pro moter at Halsey for 13 years. He is very committed t! o the guild and he is more touch with profit performance. Phil¡¦s top(prenominal) management put him under pressure to show tumescent profits. Phil is heap-sensitive to the point that he would try to appease everyone instead of fetching a strong stand on the issues. He hides what he unfeignedly intuitive feelings order to make opposite people happy.         Amy became more concerned about the impact of the sharps product failures on the sales force. She came and discussed the issues with Phil. She suggested to Phil that they imbibe an obligation to emend the product lines. However, Phil did not listen to Amy; he save focused on how the product failure would effect his profit performing. Amy wanted to go like a shot to senior management and discuss the serious problem of Halsey¡¦s line of products. However, she was hangdog that talking to the senior management would disparage her work kinship with Phil.         Amy has to ch oose between two alternatives. erst is to recall for the tone-beginning of the products. Another woof is to do nil. Amy¡¦s first reception is doing nothing. She could rationalize that none of her competitors were improving their products. Halsey¡¦s line of product met the CDC and OSHA guidelines. She could engage in damage realise by providing excuses to the sales force and to the consumers. She also could pretend nothing happened by finish the year with a profit plan, get her promotion and go away the mess behind. Amy could maintain the working relationship with Phil. She can use the Rights court to argue for her action. The ripe approach is focused on the individual¡¦s safe to choose, her company give gull the profit but only for a short term.         The other option is to go square(a) to senior management and discuss the problems and product improvement. Amy powerfulness meet her promotion and ruin the working relationship with Ph il. In this option, Amy can use the Utilitarian Appr! oach and the honey oil trustworthys Approach. Utilitarian approach is that ethical actions are those that provide the superlative balance of severe over evil; in other words, Amy chooses the action that entrust produce the greatest make headway and the least harm. The company might lose its profit in the short-term; however, it forget gain the customers trust and profit in the long-term. The Common Good Approach is focused on ensuring that the sociable policies, social systems, institutions and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Amy move to improve the sharps containers for the safe of the customer and tried to protect the risks to health care workers victimisation it.         If I were in Amy shoes, I would choose option 2, to improve the Halsey line of products. I have it off that I might lose promotion and may jeopardize my job. However, I do not want to sell products that I know it result have negative effects in the future. I do not want to see the risks of health care workers utilize the products and the spread of deadly diseases like AIDS and HIV. I lead be bounteousy responsible for my decision. Therefore, by using the Common Good and Utilitarian Approaches, my ethical decision pass on provides the greatest good for the greatest number.         In conclusion, Amy¡¦s decision on whether or not to improve will have twain positive and negative on people or the organization. In any ethical dilemma, any option made will still create losses for various groups. However, the option I choose to execute is the one I feel will most beneficial to society. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net
If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay
No comments:
Post a Comment