1

Masehullah Stanikzai

MGMT 117

Pooria Assadi

03/12/21

2577 Words

Ethical Dilemma at Workplace

When it comes to ethical dilemmas at the workplace, there could be various situations

where people get confused on what to do because there are consequential results in both

situations. While working within an organization people do not tend to know the effect of

a shareholder on stakeholders such as clients, employees, and community members. It is

difficult to decide what is the better option to do when you discover a shareholder, or a

stakeholder is stealing from the organization. Therefore, two questions arise from the

situation. The first question, is it the ethical and moral responsibilities of stakeholders to

inform the responsible authorities about what is happening in the organization regardless

of the unpleasant consequences? The second question is it the responsibility of the

organization itself to find out about the stealing of the shareholder from the organization

and not put stakeholders in trouble? That is where the ethical dilemma comes into

consideration for the stakeholder on whether to allow the shareholder to steal from the

organization and put the organization’s growth at risk or consult with someone about the

shareholder’s action without thinking about the negative consequences it might bring. 

If a shareholder or stakeholder is stealing from the organization and someone is aware of

the situation, it is the ethical responsibility of that person to report the issue without

thinking about the consequence it may have. The ethics and morals of a person can be
2

determined when they are working with a dishonest person within a team, organization,

department, or even client. It is up to the people to decide if they want to raise their

voices and expose the ones around them who are involved in unethical behavior or stay

silent and protect them even though they are confident that what they are doing is wrong.

I have seen many people who watch everything and stay silent because they don’t want to

lose their friends or support. I used to work as a welfare assistant for an international

organization where I was managing the petty cash for the office as well. My manager and

finance officers were the only two authorized managers to sign for any check that was

used for purchasing anything including inventories for the gyms and other welfare items

required for the common rooms. As soon as I joined, I realized and told by many

employees that the welfare manager and finance officer both were involved in some sort

of corruption. They withdrew a large amount of money from the petty cash though

creating fake purchase orders of non-counted assets which are usually not entered in the

supply and inventory system as they are considered disposable items. When I asked the

employee that if they have reported the issue to the organization, they told me that they

are scared to report the problem since both the finance officer and welfare officer threaten

the employees that they have strong ties with the senior management, and nobody can

challenge them. They also told me that the previous welfare assistant was also fired

because he reported those discrepancies. However, the welfare assistant had no prove to

show to the audit because they were able to tender everything before the audit was done.

Moreover, based on their strong connection with some senior managers they were able to

prove the welfare assistant guilty of stealing the money himself and was fired from the

organization. This problem was negatively affecting the organization because the
3

organization suffers different consequences by confronting it. I decided to report this

issue by gathering all the purchase orders of these items and called each vendor for the

reality of these purchase orders. I found out that mostly these purchase orders were fake,

and those items were not counted on the supply manifest as well because based on the

organization’s policy those items were considered disposable, means not part of the

organization counted assets. Now the question, is it unethical for me as his subordinate to

report him to the chief mission support based on my personal and moral beliefs? Is it

unethical to have a boss who misuses his authority and steals the company’s money by

creating fake purchase orders? 

As per the chapter in book The Elements of Moral Philosophy,  the author talks about that

“Classical Utilitarianism can be summed up in three propositions: (a) The morality of an

action depends solely on the consequences of the action; nothing else matters. (b) An

action’s consequences matter only insofar as they involve the greater or lesser happiness

of individuals. (c) In the assessment of consequences, each individual’s happiness gets

“equal consideration.” (Rachels) which means our actions can affect others and we must

be mindful of that. The utilitarianism theory explains that the welfare manager action was

only benefiting him instead of others in the organization. This means that the money he

has withdrawn from the petty cash benefited him only however, on the other side this

money was supposed to be spent on common rooms and facilities for staff who were

working in the most stressful situation for the organization. People’s perspective can be

change for a reason because they choose to do things by changing their values that can be

forgiven in their mind to continue to do something unethical. Is it possible for individuals

to overlook all the consequences of their actions and continue to do things without

comprehending their impact on others?

As stated in chapter five by the book The Dimension of Consequentialism: Ethics Equality and Risk, the

author argues that “The potentially good and the potentially bad consequences, affect the

act’s deontic status in different ways. The potentially good consequences contribute

towards making the act right, whereas the potentially bad consequences have the opposite

effect. Because of this clash between two conflicting aspects, risky acts are both right and

wrong to some degree.” (Peterson). In case none of the choices meets the requirements

for accomplishing a goal, the alternative may have features that can lead to the negative

action-based outcomes. In this typical situation, the Welfare manager broke the rules and

policy of the organization, in which organization clearly stated that any illegal use of

office assets should be treated unethical and subject to a written warning. He also fired an

honest and hardworking staff member, which was a breach of organization’s code of

conduct related to abuse of authority and subject to summary dismissal. The

consequentialism theory demonstrates that there are consequences for each action either

good or bad. In this case, the welfare manager knew that the consequences related to his

actions were not only for himself but for all the employees of the organization who were

the direct beneficiaries of the welfare fund. However, the welfare manager never regrets

his actions because in his mind that it didn’t physically harm anyone plus it is his right to

do so as he paid a bribe to get the position within the organization. 

Meanwhile, based on the theory if the employee would remain silent even though it was

their responsibility to raise the incident then there would be no consequences for the

welfare manager. In addition, the employee will be equally guilty as the Welfare manager
5

if they tend not to report the incident. Moreover, if the organization finds out about the

action of the Welfare manager and the employee who tend to stay quite despite knowing

everything about the manager’s action will have equal consequences as the Welfare

manager. In this case, there are two sides of the issues which might have two different

(Positive and Negative consequences). As stated in the book “The last part of

Utilitarianism says that we must treat each person’s happiness as equally important or as

Mill put it, we must be “as strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator.”

(Daniel). The positive consequences of the theory could be that nobody knows what

happened since neither the employee nor the welfare manager disclosed anything

regarding the problem, so we can say both the perpetrator and victims are safe. On the

negative side, both the welfare manager and employees will be equally treated guilty if

the organization finds out that the employees knew about the problem, but they decided

to keep quiet rather than reporting the issue. Despite any good reason for a wrong action

the morality and its consequence will still be a bad consequence.

The Non-Consequentialism theory is defined in the book of Intricate Ethics as “a type of

normative ethical theory that denies that the rightness or wrongness of our conduct is

determined solely by the goodness or badness of the consequences of our acts or of the

rules to which those acts conform” (Kamm). Based on the definition people might

commit wrong actions and justify their wrong action to themselves by claiming about

their good intention. However, the theory argues that even if there are rules exist to steal

from the welfare fund, the welfare manager is still required to justify his actions on why

he committed these unethical or wrong actions. He knew that his actions were wrong but

since he probably needed that money, he did it anyway regardless of the consequences he
6

might face with. He was always creating a different justification for his actions to show

that he has used that money for good causes. He was claiming that since he was not able

to officially use the welfare fund for those causes, he had to use a wrong way to take out

the money from the fund. However, even if his justifications are right, but the

consequences are wrong base on his action because he took negative advantage of his

authority by misusing the budget that was allocated for the wellbeing of staff without

thinking about the consequences. A pro for this theory that he thought his reasons were

justifiable to avoid any consequence it may occur. On the con side although he was

supporting good causes, he still broke the faith of everyone who trusted him and give him

the authority to use their money in accordance with the policies, procedures, and welfare

of the staff. Therefore, he had to accept and deal with the consequences. 

After looking and reviewing various theories and morals explained above, the ideal

theory for this issue would be consequentialism theory because it connects people’s

actions to their consequences. This can be also reflected in the tasks we perform

especially by the virtue of our actions and how we differentiate the right from the wrong.

It is logical that if we practice false measures to get to our goals then it will have a

negative impact on ourselves and so do on our friends and others in the workplace. We

should put at least our minimum efforts to do best not just for ourselves but for the sake

of others as well. It will be more satisfying when we take actions and decisions which are

beneficial for everyone without compromising any rule and regulation. In addition, if we

are aware of consequences that our wrong action might bring to us and others around us

then we will think twice before taking that actions, as well as try to avoid it as much as

we can. This simply means that as a shareholder or stakeholders we all have some
7

responsibilities of being honest to each other and acknowledge that whatever we do will

affect others in one way or another. 

Moreover, the morals and ethics of each person are equally vital for diverse

circumstances that can occurred at the workplace. It is important to take a brave step if

you feel that there is something fishy or incorrect happening and you need to report it.

People will hardly be harmful to others if they know the wrong consequence of such

actions. Therefore, if you are aware that a shareholder is stealing money from the

investors or using the stakeholder’s fund inaccurately and you tend to stay silent and let

the issue grow up then it means that you are partnering them in their wrong actions.

Moreover, if I would have had the opportunity to get back into that time and situation I

experienced in our organization. I would have had taken a different approach by

advocating the employees to speak up rather than staying silent and wait for me to take a

stance on the action by myself. It could have even prevented the manager from firing a

honest and loyal staff members. This experience at the workplace helped me understand

that it is always important to open up if you see something wrong or advocate others to

speak if they see something without stressing about the consequence. The other issue is

that our good cause cannot justify our unethical behavior and even though if the money is

stolen for a good cause the person involved in this action should be aware of its

consequences. This is a situation that I can never forget, and this paper helped me to be

able to deal better with such a situation if faced in the future. After discussing these

theories, all the good and bad decisions we make will have a good or bad consequence.

Simply it is by doing the right thing not only because it will provide us with eternal

happiness for ourselves it will also make others happy who are around us. It would also
8

make us feel peaceful for ourselves by taking the best alternative regardless of its

outcome even if it is unpleasant. We should always think about the best interest of

everyone not just ourselves because of any reason or consequence that could endure as

utilitarianism.

Based on the variety of consequences pertaining to our actions, we should assure

ourselves that all our actions should not be just for our own personal interest, but it

should be in the best interest of everyone involved in the team, department, or

organization. Everyone should contribute actively and efficiently to the achievement of

the organization and help to promote the common interest of the organization. It is the

responsibility of the employees to pinpoint anyone whose behavior is negatively affecting

others or the organization. In the same context, it is the responsibility of everyone to raise

their voice and say whatever they see as in conflict with the best interest of the other

people and the organization. We should not leave it to the organization to find what is

going wrong but help them to find out those problems. It is an important decision that all

stakeholders should take to maximize the growth of the organization as well as eliminate

and report any wrong actions. As soon as the people will know that their wrongdoings are

reported, and the employees and teammates are observing their actions then they will stay

focus and remain careful with their actions pertaining the organization’s assets and

money. 
9

References

1. Jacobson, Daniel. “Utilitarianism without Consequentialism: The Case of John Stuart

Mill.” The Philosophical Review, vol. 117, no. 2, 2008, pp. 159–191. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/40606016. Accessed 20 Apr. 2021.

2. Johnston, R J, and Derek Gregory. The Dictionary of Human Geography. Oxford:

Blackwell Reference, 1981. Print.

3. Rachels, James, and Stuart Rachels. The elements of moral philosophy.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986.

4. Peterson, Martin. The Dimensions of Consequentialism: Ethics, Equality and

Risk, Cambridge University Press, 2013. ProQuest Ebook Central,

http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csus/detail.action?docID=1099954.

Created from csus on 2021-04-19 18:24:35.