Ethics and Legal Environment, Business Association and Torts, Critical Thinking - Assignment Example

BUSINESS ASSIGNMENT Issue #1: Ethics and Legal Environment Garry's dilemma has all the making of the right versus right managerial problem addressed by the Badaracco framework. On one hand, there is the retention of Gabe as chairman of the board because it is the right thing to do. The man - as a person - has proven his mettle and worth as member of the organization. In addition, his crime, which he has already paid for, has transpired several years ago and most of his life has been devoted to giving back to the community. On the other hand, the growing demand for his removal indicates an obligation to remove him from his post. The negative publicity can affect the firm's performance in the market and Gabe’s tenure might also cause dissension within the organization itself, especially among the shareholders who are intent on making profit. To decide on this matter, Badaracco impresses on the decision maker to judge responsibly. Ultimately, he proposes the evaluation of the interests of all the stakeholders involved. The idea is to determine the benefit so that the decision will achieve "the most good and the least harm" (p.5). The entire list that should be evaluated to determine the net benefit can be constituted by the entire organization. This variable is representative of the shareholders, the employees and Garry, himself, as the owner. Such evaluation however, is complicated by the fact that a dismissal may have mixed impact internally. For instance, the organization may benefit from it as it could achieve favorable market perception. However, the organization could also suffer from being kept out of a beneficial chairmanship. To resolve this, one could try looking at specific details of the case. An outline of these relevant facts can reveal the best possible benefit for the organization. First, there is the fact that Gabe is not only a productive leader but he also excels in forging relationships. He has great people skills, a trait that helped him earn the chairmanship in the first place. It follows, therefore, that he has excellent relations with both employees and shareholders alike. He must, therefore, be well regarded among these stakeholders. Calls for his dismissal, hence, may not be strong within the firm. It is also helpful to consider several mitigating circumstances. There is Gabe’s work for the community and his causes. In addition, there is the motivation behind the exposure of Gabe's criminal record. Skeeter had malicious intent in leaking Gabe's story to the media. Secondly, there is the impact of firing Gabe. The company faces the possibility of litigation on a discrimination charge. There is the issue of violation of employment rights especially when there was no intent to keep the criminal record a secret and the fact that the information was not asked for. Universal criminal laws posit that a criminal past does not need to ruin one’s career. The process may prove to be counterproductive despite a favorable judicial outcome. It will generate negative publicity, which would defeat the very purpose of dismissing Gabe in the first place. It will also highlight Garry’s culpability for not undertaking due diligence when he offered Gabe a position in the board. It is also helpful to remember that American jurisprudence that covers ethical issues in organization indicate norms that affect juridical decisions and these are justice, stability, freedom and efficiency (Kubasek, Brennan & Brown, 2015, p. 7). Garry should anticipate that the judge will not look kindly at his case. For the judge and, eventually, for the world it would mean as if he was willing to sacrifice Gabe’s rights just to placate a restless market and eke out profit despite Garry’s oversight, Gabe’s rights and the decision’s implications on issues such as of discrimination and organizational ethics. It is helpful to remind Garry that the American legal tradition gives weight to the so-called “legal reasoning”. The conclusion of an issue, which in this case is Gabe’s dismissal, will be evaluated according to the decision’s reasoning. Was the company right to fire Gabe? Was the company without fault? Was the conclusion fair and just? These questions, among others, would all be resolved by the legal reasoning’s unequivocal requirement for facts and ethical norms (p. 10). Unfortunately, these variables work in favor of Gabe’s case. There are several flawed evidences in the reasoning to dismiss Gabe, which according to the Browne and Keely framework, makes a conclusion unacceptable or, at least, difficult to support (Browne and Keely, 2014, p. 36). Also, it is important to underscore that dismissing Gabe based on his decades old conviction could send the wrong message and demonstrate a poor brand of leadership for the company. It translates to an unacceptable policy of discriminating against people with criminal records, indicating offenders have no way back into the community. This particular fact is rejected by Gabe's track record not just as a productive member of the workforce but also as a concerned citizen of the community. There are strong and clear evidences that support these and Garry would be remiss to discount them. Garry, himself, was witness to the kind of individual Gabe is, personally and professionally. His past conviction never defined his character, his work and his relations with others. Moreover, an opportunity for the organization presents itself here: one which could address the perception of the community. Presently, the response from this sector is unfavorable but the firm could turn it around. Gabe’s chairmanship could become a cornerstone of a corporate social responsibility strategy that highlights an attempt to give offenders - those who have since paid their dues to society - a second chance. This opportunity should address the other considerations in the Badaracco framework. Keeping Gabe will communicate strong corporate ideals and principles. In addition, Garry himself knows that it could work in the world as it is if only for the fact that he knows Gabe personally and his capability to help the organization and the community. So in weighing all the above factors to determine the net benefit, Garry would do well to consider that keeping Gabe as chairman will be good for the organization. Issue #2: Organizational Environment Based from Rawling Dough’s vision for Behemoth, the matrix organizational structure is a perfect fit for the organization. He has outlined three specific objectives, which all are typified by a mix of characteristics: global and local; large and small; decentralized and centralized. The matrix framework effectively combines organizational structures to address and take advantage of the current international environment where international organizations must operate in. It is known to integrate product, geographic and functional groups. In a matrix organizational structure, a business unit located in a particular country is required to report to more than one entity in the global organization. For instance, a Behemoth sales department in its UK subsidiary must report not just to the vice president for sales in the company’s headquarters but also to Behemoth’s European regional manager. In this manner, Behemoth will have the structure of responsibility, its research activities and flow of communication transpiring both vertically and horizontally. This system will ensure that Behemoth and its managers are able to shift from global to local strategy or adopt both at the same time without any problem. It also provides the mechanisms for a large and nimble organization to guarantee that it takes advantage of global economies of scale and yet still be flexible enough to adjust to market changes. Finally, characteristic to matrix organizational structure is a system of reporting in which reporting relationship is set up as a grid, or matrix, thereby allowing dual reporting from employees, especially by doing so to the functional manager and to the product manager, or their equivalents (Jones, 2011, p. 35). This allows for both decentralized and centralized decision-making, ensuring control, accountability and consistency. To implement the matrix organizational structure, Dough must consider the following pros and cons: Advantages: The structure makes it possible for individuals to employ certain skills and expertise in different contexts. To this effect, Behemoth employees will have the capability of running two projects at the same time within the organization. This is made even more efficient by the availability of a functional home that allows shifting between projects as conditions may necessitate. A practical example of this trait is the possibility of transferring individuals to another project in the event that the designated project encounters some delay in commencement. Through this, the organization is able to attain efficient utilization of resources through time partitioning i.e. varying instance and duration of engagement of an individual in a given project or project. Given that Behemoth is scheduled to be a multinational company, the structure promises a pool of expertise to almost all projects in the organization, an occurrence that is central for not only good results, but maximum utilization of the available expertise as well. It also breaks down the departmental barriers typical of hierarchical structure, hence improving communication in the entire organization. With improved communication comes timely identification of problems and improved conflict resolution capabilities. The availability of dual reporting paths i.e. through the project manager and through the functional manager elevates the chances of identifying a looming problem, after which it can be suppressed, though the latter is not guaranteed. Given the nature of interaction this structure offers, it is highly likely to result in greater motivation among employees. Disadvantages An extensive analysis of this structure reveals that it is complex when it comes to coordinating different project teams, giving rise to accountability issues that may act as seeds of discord among different teams. Other analysts have noted that transition periods from other organizational structure(s) to matrix structure is fraught with challenges as employees find it difficult to adapt to the new system. However, since Behemoth will adopt it from the onset of its operation, proper induction of the team may deter such a problem. Prominent in this structure are cases of divided loyalties, a problem that can put team members under intense work pressure, and having the potential of being large and partitioned, Behemoth may find this a great challenge. Outlook of matrix structure in terms of business units and spans of control At high level, a matrix structure would be attractive to Dough and Behemoth’s managers. The matrix structure defines the authority of a functional manager as vertically downward flowing while that of the project manager as being horizontal. What this means is that both the business units and the global managers have strategic control and authority over Behemoth’s global operations. This can be highlighted in the control over product development and sales cycles. It has been cited that most of the company’s clients are governments and sales transactions are determined by national political considerations. The matrix structure will ensure that Behemoth decision makers both at the local and international levels can decide and coordinate during these processes to ensure the achievement of objectives. Country managers have control of their respective subsidiaries so that they contribute effectively to the processes based on country specific inputs. Behemoth’s headquarters, on the other hand, can monitor and control performance as well as ensure that organizational culture and the latest research and innovations are transferred and embedded in its subsidiaries. Furthermore, while workers report to their local managers, the structure will also allow these workers to report other matters to the head office directly. Furthermore, handling of disciplinary matters will be the responsibility of the local subsidiaries, as is the case with promotion and remuneration issues. A point of note is that employees are expected to perform their duties based on requirements set at the local level in order to avoid insubordination. All in all, the span of control in the matrix structure is more wide than narrow, making the organization more efficient. There is a high degree of control on the local level and few levels of management at Behemoth, allowing for autonomy in decision-making for business units and organizational flexibility especially when it comes to decision making. Issue #3: Critical Thinking Critical thinking, applied to a text, is a process that allows the valid determination of whether its arguments and its thesis are valid. According to Browne and Keeley (2014), one is able undertake this process through the evaluation of the presented evidences and the text’s conclusion (p. 36). The following section exploits these strategies to develop conceptual meaning and analysis of the given text. The issue and the conclusion The issue is the superhuman based argument. The author argues in favor of the Wolverine. The writer further argues that Wolverine is the best superhuman ever and concludes that it is only allowable to spend your cash on Wolverine or X-men project and that only Marvel comics produce the best blockbuster movies. The author tries to present the reader with a case of better alternative based on his/her taste, and concludes that it is better for viewers to shun other movies for the sake of Wolverine. Explanation of reasoning fallacies present in the text The author in the case study confirms that there are other movies with superheroes such as Batman and The Watchman. Concerning the movies, he says that they have “complex and depressing plots” that “nobody” would like to pay attention to. While it may be true that they have complex plots, the mere fact that the author finds such movies unpleasant does not mean none does, thus a logical fallacy. Secondly, the author employs selection bias by praising Wolverine based on the fact that it his/her favorite movie. He/she further shows us the level of his prejudice by stating that other superhero movies involve complex contents, as opposed to his/her favorite Wolverine. To this effect, the author displays his confirmation bias. The third case of a fallacy in reasoning is evident where the author presents only two alternatives, topping the charts, which implies being the best as did the movie Wolverine, or failing to be at the top and thus implying failure of other producers to produce quality movies. Just by the mere fact that Wolverine was more successful in the box office does not imply DC Comics are losers, hence a case of false dilemma. Case of value assumption in the text The author states that, “but nobody likes movies with complex, depressing plots that make you have to pay attention to figure out what’s happening.” In so doing, the writer relates a complex plot to be equal to depressing and not entertaining, thus fail just short of directly saying non-complex plots are entertaining. This is a value assumption in that the writer assumes their implicit preference of non-complex plots and subsequently finding them more entertaining as compared to complex plots in this context. Issue #4: Business Association and Torts Based from my preference in terms of control, a corporation is out of the question since it has a complex structure, with decision making distributed among several individuals. It is for the same reason I will rule out general partnership and limited liability partnership (LLP). Both of these entail sharing management responsibility to a partner, along with other aspects of the business. Sole proprietorship can give me the control I want because I would entirely own the business. However, I still need funds to cover the expenses for the next two years. Furthermore, there is the risk here of unlimited personal responsibility in the event of loss and liability. I would, therefore, choose limited partnership. It will give me the advantage of raising more cash and thus give me a greater credit index in terms of increasing my borrowing capacity. More importantly, in this form of partnership, the structure is divided between the general partner and limited partners. The former, which I would fulfill, will manage the day to day operation of the gym. It will satisfy the degree of control I want over the business. This is possible because, despite their input, limited partners are not involved in management. Limited partnership further benefits the firm through complementary skills from the limited partners as it increases the pool of skills and knowledge. These partners, for instance, can act as marketing contacts for the firm giving it priceless marketing platform. I would also use the incentive of becoming a partner to woo prospective employees. Part of my greatest benefit would be the fact that I am not liable to explain to the limited partners on the daily operations and forthwith I would not need to consult the limited partners on the daily operations of the gym. Specifically, the advantage of this type of partnership over general partnership is that a limited partner’s liability is limited to his/her input to the company. Additionally, in the event that a limited partner withdraws, the business will not face imminent closure. In the event of loss making and or no growth, a partnership has its risk greatly reduced. Tax benefits meanwhile, flow through the company to the partner who also pay taxes as per their personal income tax returns. From the above discussion, a limited partnership will be a great way to offer investors the opportunity to benefit from GlutMax, giving me my much-needed control in return. Furthermore, limited partnership business is easier to establish as they do not require a lot of paper work, and do not present complications in managing and sustaining them. Legal versus ethical responsibility in the case According to the Law of Torts, legally, Josh is liable for compensation arising from the damages to the fence. The damage caused by the car on Josh’s fence gives rise to a civil claim. The objective of this is to place the victim on the point they were at prior to the occurrence of act and shift the loss burden from the victims to the perpetrators. The damage is clearly due to unintentional trespass leading to destruction of property. It can be understood that the tort occurred because of unintentional act of not engaging the brakes and thus would rule out malicious damage to property. With this in view, legally Flicka is responsible for Josh’s fence repairs as she was the direct perpetrator of the unintentional mistake that led to the damage. On the other hand, the accident occurred while Flicka was running my errands. At the point of the tort occurring, I had hired Flicker to do the errands for me. The tort occurred as a risk. Had I not hired Flicka to do the errands for me the damage would not have occurred? In this view am ethically bound to pay for Josh’s fence repairs and not Flicka. In summary, discussed herein above are the ethical and legal aspects of tort payment. Legally a tort is not a mistake, but rather an unintentional mistake made by a perpetrator and on the balance of probabilities, the loss has to shift from the victim to the perpetrator, who in this case is Flicka. Ethically, the damage to Josh’s fence occurred as a result of my instructions to Flicka. Thus making me responsible as the mistake occurred while she was acting under my instructions and thus I should be responsible for the repairing the fence. References Badaracco, J. L., Jr. (2002). Defining moments: A framework for moral decisions. Harvard Business School Faculty Seminar Series. Browne, M. N., and Keeley, S. M. (2014).Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking (11thed.). Boston: Pearson. Jones, G. (2010). Organizational Theory and Design. Boston: Pearson Education Inc. Kubasek, N., Brennan, B., and Browne, N. (2015). The Legal Environment of Business. Boston: Pearson Education. Read More