Sarah Goodwin was a recent MBA graduate who was interested in retailing. She had
ID: 382111 • Letter: S
Question
Sarah Goodwin was a recent MBA graduate who was interested in retailing. She had been delighted to receive a job offer from a large and prestigious department store chain. The first year of employment at this chain was considered a training program, but formal instruction was very limited. Each of the new trainees was assigned to work as an assistant to a buyer in one of the departments. The intent was that the trainees would work with five or six buyers during the year, rotating assignments every two months and would make themselves “useful” enough during those assignments so at least one buyer would ask to have that person join his or her department on a permanent basis. Buyers are critical in the management of a department store. They select the goods to be offered, negotiate terms of purchase, set retail prices, arrange displays, organize promotions, and are generally responsible for the operation of the departments within the store. In this particular chain each department acted as a profit center and sales and profits were calculated on a per square foot basis. Buyers competed, on a friendly basis, to outperform each other so that their square footage would be expanded. The buyers received substantial commissions based upon monthly profits. Sarah’s first assignment was to work for the buyer in the gourmet foods department. The buyer for gourmet foods, Maria Castellani, was a well-known personality throughout the company. She was considered competent, witty, and sarcastic. She had strong ties with most people in the company and it seemed that everybody in the store seemed to find a reason to stop by the gourmet food department at least once during the day to chat with Maria. Sarah was naturally included in these conversations, and consequently she was getting to know all the other buyers. This networking made it easy for her to build relationships with other buyers for her future assignments. For the first five weeks of her employment, Sarah was exceptionally happy and pleased with her career choice. She felt that she was performing well on her first job, and making sensible arrangements for her next assignment. Then, an event occurred that called her contentment into question: We received a shipment of thin little wafers from England that have a crème filling. They were packaged in foil-covered boxes, but somehow they had come to be infested with insects. We did not think that all of the boxes were infested, because not all of the customers brought them back. However, some people did and, obviously, we could not continue to sell them. We could not inspect the packages, and keep the ones that were not infested, because there were too many—about $12,000 worth—and because we have had to tear the foil to open each box. Maria said that the manufacturer would not give us a refund because the infestation doubtless occurred during shipment, or even during storage at our own warehouse. Maria told me to get rid of them. I thought she meant for me to arrange to have them taken to the dump, but she said, “Absolutely not. Call (name of executive) at (name of discount convenience store chain). They mainly operate in the inner city and they can sell anything. We’ve got to get our money back.”
Describe how someone in Sarah Goodwin’s position might respond to this situations consideration each of the ethical perspectives (utilitarian, rights, fairness or justice, common good, virtue) we discussed in class. Of these, either individually or in combination, what course of action would you favor and why?
Explanation / Answer
Maria has two options
Utilitarianism – here a decision that does greatest good for the greatest number of people of that causes least harm is taken is taken .ends justify the means. The decision that provides the most good or the least harm is taken
The first option – ‘dispose the wafers,’ is the one that causes the least harm to all. Hence the wafers have to be dumped
Virtue approach- the decision should be in agreement with ideal virtues like Honesty, courage, compassion, fidelity, integrity, fairness etc.,
The second option goes against many virtues like fairness in treatment of consumers/society, compassion towards fellow human beings etc
The first option is the one that goes with virtues. Hence this has to be chosen
Fairness Approach – here the decision that treats all humans equally is taken. Focuses on equitable and fair distribution of justice, benefits, costs, harm etc
In the second option, by selling to the discount store Maria is causing harm to the discount store consumers but doing good to her store consumers- unequal distribution of justice/ harm. Hence the second option is ignored.
The first option helps in equal distribution of justice.
Rights approach: here the decision respects the moral rights of all affected
The consumer s of the discount store has a right to be told the truth and the right not to be injured. If Maria sells to the discount store, then the rights of the discount store consumers – right not to be injured is affected. Hence the second option is ignored.
The first option respects the moral rights of everyone in the community
Common good approach- Here the decision that contributes to the good of everyone in the society is chosen.
The second option helps one sect of society and harms the other
The option of dumping is the one that helps in the common good. Hence the first option is chosen
Both individually and by combining all the above ethical principles, the first option of dumping is the one I would favor for Maria.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.