Case Analysis
Instructions
- Read carefully through this whole document.
- Read the assigned case
- Watch the video on using a decision-making framework
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuVf2gmSvP4&feature=youtu.be. Make notes.
- Read the case again. Highlight, or otherwise note the facts in the case that stand out to you.
- Roughly jot down some of your initial reactions and questions in response to the case.
- Now, you need to read three pieces
- The Darden note on the four different moral lenses. The note is called “ Moral Theory, Frameworks, and the Language of Ethics and Business”. (Attached)
- The book chapter we read in Part 3, Week 1 of the course (with the essays about
- Utilitarianism, Kantian thinking and Virtue Ethics). On Blackboard it’s listed as: “Book chapter: General Issues in Business Ethics (Attached)
- The paper on the feminist interpretation of the stakeholder concept, listed as
“BEQ Article Wicks et al”. (Attached)
How to approach the write-up of your case analysis
- Your case analysis needs to be structured as follows
Case Analysis Steps
○ Step 1: Describe the situation that the protagonist is faced with through the different moral lenses we discussed in this course. To do so, ask yourself: “What would a Kantian be asking to try and determine the right course of action?”; “What would an ethics of care perspective be prompting me to ask, to try and figure the way to proceed?” etc.
Remember that applying a moral lens at the “entry level” would be to stick to the basic descriptions of each moral lens as they feature in the Darden tech note. For at least two of the lenses, you need to go deeper by relying on the concepts and arguments from the book chapter with essays and the paper on feminist interpretations of the stakeholder concept.
TO REITERATE: In Step 1, you need to discuss ALL FOUR lenses at the entry-level. You are required to go to the deeper level with (at least) two of them. The distinction between the “entry” and “deeper” level pertains strictly to the different sets of materials you are drawing from. Are you making claims, or asking questions that are based on the Darden Coursepack note called “Moral Theory, Frameworks, and the Language of Ethics and Business”? Then you are at the entry-level. Are you making claims and asking questions prompted by the two more in-depth readings, “Book chapter: General Issues in Business Ethics” and “BEQ Article Wicks et al”? Then you are at the deeper level.
This step should leave you with a list of inter-related issues and questions, under four subheadings: Utilitarianism (Consequences); Deontology (Principles); Virtue Ethics (Character); Ethics of Care (Relationships). No need to draw a conclusion based on each lens. Use the lenses to expand your thinking, not to come to a recommendation from the perspective of each lens. Do your very best not to get caught up yet in the alternative courses for action; that only comes in Step 2, 3 & 4.
○ Step 2: Explicate the obvious alternative courses of action to the protagonist’s disposal. Evaluate these alternatives in terms of the issues described and the questions you formulated under each of the moral approaches in Step 1. No need to repeat in detail what you said in Step 1, simply refer back to specific points. Make clear where you see potential trade-offs involved in the “obvious” alternative courses of action.
To clarify: In step 2, you do not need to discuss each of the obvious alternatives (those baked into the case) in terms of each of the four lenses. You can do it that way, but you need not. The most important thing is that you draw from your thinking in step 1, in whichever way, to point out the TRADE-OFFS if you were to go either of the two routes.
○ Step 3: Explore how the existing alternatives can be improved to avoid severe trade-offs. This is where you should activate the “what could we do” mode; and especially some of your considerations under the ethics of care lens could come in useful here. For both steps 2 and Step 3, Smith et al. 2016 (the paper about both/and leadership) can help! In that paper, look specifically at the section where they talk about separating and then connecting. (Attached)
○ Step 4: Craft your recommendation for the protagonist. NB: Carefully note the characteristics of a strong recommendation in the video.
○ Step 5: Explicate where and how you think the protagonist will need to be prepared to “engage and iterate”.
○ NOTE: You need no introduction in which you summarize the case facts. Dive directly into Step 1.
TECHNICAL & OTHER EXPECTATIONS
- Technical requirements:
○ Use: font size 12, Times New Roman font type, single line spacing, 1 inch
margins all around the page
○ Your submission should contain certain headings and subheadings, no less and no more. Please replicate my formatting in the template uploaded and go ahead and use that. (Attached)
○ Dedicate the following volume to each of the sections:
Step 1: ~2 pages
Steps 2 & 3: ~ 1-1.5 pages Steps 4 & 5: ~ 1-1.5 pages
○ Your whole analysis should under no circumstance exceed five pages in total, and should not be less than four pages.
○ If you would like to use quotes from the theoretical material, do rely on APA style in-text citations. No need to include a bibliography, since the sources you will be relying on are limited in number and known to us as the graders.
○ You can write in the third or in first-person — whatever makes it easier for you to apply the moral lenses/ theories, and the rest of the decision framework.
Answer preview
Step I: Evaluating the Protagonist’s Situation through different Moral Lenses
Deontology
According to the Darden note on the four different moral lenses, four traditions aid with the categorization of business ethics (Wicks et al., 2016). One such tradition is the principles and standards of conduct, which gave rise to deontological ethics. Deontology is not concerned with the person performing an action or the likely consequence (Wicks et al., 2016). Instead, it places emphasis on the actions taken by people and then assesses such actions to ascertain whether they were ethically acceptable. Deontological principles are informed by numerous sources, with the most common ones being religious and philosophical traditions. Richard Alpert, a senior partner at Evergreen Investments, is dealing with an ethical dilemma. This dilemma revolves around who Alpert should promote to managing VP between Charlie Pace and Daniel Faraday (Harris & Mead, 2012). Pace was the clear favorite to land the position due to his consistent and excellent performances for quite some time. Even though Faraday worked as hard as Pace, his performance levels could not match those put up by Pace. Learning about Pace’s Adderall use, despite not having an ADHD diagnosis, contributed to the dilemma Alpert is facing (Harris & Mead, 2012). On the one hand, promoting Pace over Faraday despite knowing that he uses Adderall to enhance his performance would be unfair to Daniel Faraday. On the other hand, since most investment bankers use off-label stimulants. Thus such conduct is considered normal, promoting Pace will be okay. However, since Pace’s performance depended on his Adderall use, how would cutting him off affect his performance after being promoted. Should Alpert decide to adopt the deontological ethical framework to try and ascertain the right course of action, he should ask himself whether Adderall use without a positive diagnosis for ADHD as a means of enhancing one’s performance is universally agreed-upon conduct.
Virtue Ethics
Under the Aristotelean ethical approach argues that individuals discover their identity and meaning by belonging to a particular community such as an organization (Solomon, 1992). Such an aspect then means that within the corporate world, people should be mindful that they do not belong to a single community but rather are members of two communities; the organization they work in and the larger society within which an organization operates. As a person who embraces Aristotelean ethics, Alpert should consider a couple of things to determine the right course of action. Specifically, Alpert should look at whether using Adderall as a way to boost performance is an acceptable practice within the organization he works for and within the investment banking industry and the larger society. Figuring this out will provide Alpert with an optimum solution for the ethical dilemma plaguing him from the Aristotelean ethical perspective.
Utilitarianism
Under this theory, when organizational leaders are making decisions, they should look at the impact of such decisions on all these stakeholders to determine whether the decision is the right one and thus acceptable. With respect to the case study, as a utilitarian, Alpert will have to consider whether promoting Pace despite his use of Adderall to boost his performance will lead to maximum happiness for stakeholders.
Ethics of Care
Care in this context denotes an individual’s ability to offer connections and support to the people they are in a relationship with. When using the ethics of care framework, Alpert should consider whether promoting Pace despite his use of Adderall to enhance his performance will help him maintain the relationship he has not only with Pace but also with Faraday and other stakeholders within the company.
(2527 Words Answer)
