Scribd
Upload
586 views3 pages

Activity Sheet # 7 - Organization Theories For Effective Business

Hotel Prima employed 700 people and was very profitable, but the three owner/managers ordered accountants to use a double accounting system to avoid paying some taxes because they believed the government did not use taxpayer money properly. While the company provided benefits to employees like a stock ownership scheme, having dishonest accounting practices to avoid taxes undermined their success and violated the law, showing that the ends do not justify the means.

Uploaded by

Christine Ramirez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
586 views3 pages

Activity Sheet # 7 - Organization Theories For Effective Business

Hotel Prima employed 700 people and was very profitable, but the three owner/managers ordered accountants to use a double accounting system to avoid paying some taxes because they believed the government did not use taxpayer money properly. While the company provided benefits to employees like a stock ownership scheme, having dishonest accounting practices to avoid taxes undermined their success and violated the law, showing that the ends do not justify the means.

Uploaded by

Christine Ramirez
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Activity Sheet # 7– Organization Theories for effective business

ORGANIZING AS A MANAGEMENT FUNCTION

PUBLISHED ORGANIZING: CASE 8

Hotel Prima is a four-star hotel employing 700 people. Lawrence, and Alex are the major

owners/top-level managers, and it follows that they control the company. For several years, their hotel

made big profits, so they were inspired to introduce a scheme that allowed their employees to buy

stocks of their company which increased in value after years, and would continue to increase as the

years went by. Their employees, because of satisfaction for the way the three handled the hotel’s

finances, treated the company as their own and did their best in doing their respective jobs.

Although the hotel was doing well and the three major owners/top-level managers practiced

corporate social responsibility through the above-mentioned scheme, the company was not law-

abiding; this was because did it did not pay the correct taxes to the government. The company heads

ordered their accountants to practice the so-called double accounting system. Through this practice

they were able to save millions of pesos which they used to increase their capital and give additional

benefits to their employees.

Peter, Lawrence, and Alex had shared the belief that the government was not using taxpayer’s

money properly, so they agreed that their company should not pay some of its taxes.
LEARNING ASSESSMENT:

1. Are you aware of the saying “the end does not justify the means?” What does it mean?

Explain your answer.

- Human nature is naturally focused on outcomes. We can deal with a difficult,

sad story if it has a happy ending. But as young kids, we learned that the “end doesn’t justify

the means.” In other words, a positive outcome isn’t a good thing if the methods used were

dishonest or harmful to others. If a team won a big game, but used dishonest means such as

deflating the balls, the outcome itself is tarnished. If people gave gifts to the underprivileged,

but stole these gifts from others, stealing would undermine the charitable act. The Marxists

coined this phrase, and ultimately, the underlying message is that only one thing matters more

than outcome, and that is how we got there. For example, studies indicate that when we praise

effort over performance in the classroom, students end up actually doing better academically

and psychologically. On the other hand, cheating or avoiding hard classes might keep your

performance up in class, but using these means never justifies the end result. Yet as often

occurs, one principle can suggest a related one. Thus, I make the case that although the “end

doesn’t justify the means”, the “means can always justify the end.” But what does ‘means’

translate into? By means, I am not just talking about the behavioural methods by which

something is accomplished, but also the underlying purpose that is undertaken. Let’s use an

example of a longstanding, serious personal conflict with someone else. Many people, are

taught that it is best to ‘avoid the conflict’, the means to keep the peace, the end. So, although

it is difficult and can often increase conflict and uneasiness in the short-term, addressing the

conflict respectfully, transparently, and empathetically, the means to improve the well-being of

the individuals and relationship involved, the purpose is often the key to resolving a conflict,

the end. In saying all this, what we are ultimately trying embrace ourselves with are the virtues

of courage and altruism, unselfishness. Both often require the spirit of one to enable the other,

but they also entail a deep abiding pursuit of what is honest, true, and good. Sometimes this
pursuit leads to what are seemingly negative and uncomfortable outcomes, and so it is easy to

be tempted to take a different course. I remember standing by as classmates teased and

bullied a younger peer; I did nothing because I was afraid of how it might affect my own social

life. My means, doing nothing didn’t justify my end, remaining in a good social standing and I

have one thing that I learned when I experience that thing, I learn to be more focus and always

do the next right thing in the process and not the thing that we get as fast as we want because

I believe that if one thing that we get in the process where it includes all the challenges in life

we can get an amazing reward that can fulfill our heart.Thus, the end doesn’t justify the means,

but the means can always justify the end.

You might also like