Wgu C717 Fzp2 Task 2: Analyzing Ethical
Dilemmas In Business Ethics
FZP2 Task 2: Ethical Dilemmas in Business
A. A procurement manager must choose between several vendors, one of
whom is a close friend. Accepting their bid might appear biased, even if
it is legitimate. Evaluate this ethical dilemma by doing the following:
1. Without discussing how the manager is affected personally, explain one
potential impact on the organization if the manager accepts the bid from the
friend's company.
Accepting a friend's bid may be seen as biased by outsiders and even those who
work for the company. In the worst-case scenario, accepting this bid could severely
damage the organization’s reputation for fairness and integrity. A loss in reputation can
erode trust among other vendors and employees. This perception of the manager's bias,
despite any evidence of the bid’s competitiveness, can create a negative ethical climate
surrounding the company, potentially reducing employees’ morale, and can even result in
discouraging future, competitive bids
2. Without discussing how the manager is affected personally, explain one
potential impact on the organization if the manager rejects the bid from the
friend's company.
Rejecting a legitimate bid that could benefit the company out of fear of
negative perception can cost the company financially by forcing it to accept a worse
deal. This can hurt the project the company is working on and lead to subpar
product results by passing up a more beneficial outcome.
3. Analyze the ethical dilemma from a utilitarian perspective by doing the
following:
a. Explain utilitarian ethics, including two key features or characteristics.
One key characteristic within Utilitarian ethics is the mindset that the
morally right action is the one that maximizes the overall happiness of those
)
, affected and minimizes their suffering. In other words, the needs of the many
outweigh the needs of the few. Another characteristic of Utilitarianism is
impartiality, in which an individual acts as a neutral observer to ensure that
everyone's interests are treated equally.
)
Dilemmas In Business Ethics
FZP2 Task 2: Ethical Dilemmas in Business
A. A procurement manager must choose between several vendors, one of
whom is a close friend. Accepting their bid might appear biased, even if
it is legitimate. Evaluate this ethical dilemma by doing the following:
1. Without discussing how the manager is affected personally, explain one
potential impact on the organization if the manager accepts the bid from the
friend's company.
Accepting a friend's bid may be seen as biased by outsiders and even those who
work for the company. In the worst-case scenario, accepting this bid could severely
damage the organization’s reputation for fairness and integrity. A loss in reputation can
erode trust among other vendors and employees. This perception of the manager's bias,
despite any evidence of the bid’s competitiveness, can create a negative ethical climate
surrounding the company, potentially reducing employees’ morale, and can even result in
discouraging future, competitive bids
2. Without discussing how the manager is affected personally, explain one
potential impact on the organization if the manager rejects the bid from the
friend's company.
Rejecting a legitimate bid that could benefit the company out of fear of
negative perception can cost the company financially by forcing it to accept a worse
deal. This can hurt the project the company is working on and lead to subpar
product results by passing up a more beneficial outcome.
3. Analyze the ethical dilemma from a utilitarian perspective by doing the
following:
a. Explain utilitarian ethics, including two key features or characteristics.
One key characteristic within Utilitarian ethics is the mindset that the
morally right action is the one that maximizes the overall happiness of those
)
, affected and minimizes their suffering. In other words, the needs of the many
outweigh the needs of the few. Another characteristic of Utilitarianism is
impartiality, in which an individual acts as a neutral observer to ensure that
everyone's interests are treated equally.
)
