Ethical Analysis Journal: Decision-making

Ethics is a field of study involving right and wrong behavior, and moral responsibility. Numerous individuals who attempt to describe ethics frequently offer a combination of single words to express what ethics mean. These include: honesty, morals, values, standards, integrity, courage, principles, and civility (Borrello, 2005). Aristotle, building on the offerings of historians before him, presented early guidance about ethics and an effort to develop the standard of good (Beckner, 2004). Aristotle's belief was that ethics is linked to a state of happiness for humankind, and recognized the variances in opinion that transpire, this fundamental approach is still practical today. However, differences of opinion may emerge in an effort to characterize happiness. Further modifications are probable as individuals consider ethics and questions about what is good (Beckner, 2004).

Administrating what one knows is right is not continuously trouble-free, and establishing what is right is frequently challenging. Unfortunately, there is no particular collection of ethical principles, and no particular collection of moral concepts to establish decisions (Beckner, 2004). The following treatise will include an analysis of an ethical journal consisting of situations occurring within the workplace. Specifically, the analysis will include whether or not ethical analysis was, or was not, part of the decision-making process. The workplace in this treatise is a small college that strives to educate students through a professional degree program in a rigorous learning environment of classroom and clinical settings. The college awards degrees and currently has less than 100 employees and approximately 150 students.

Ethical Situation 1
Students at the college recently express their discontent with the administration, financial aid, and quality of courses taught at the college. The proprietor and prominent leader within the college acquired knowledge concerning this discontentment and had a desire to ascertain more information about the specific students expressing their discontent. The proprietor and prominent leader was able to generate a flier stating that if students would produce names of the students expressing discontent, she would pay for the total cost of their schooling.

Educators possess a responsibility to respect the rights of individuals and must decide when prima-facie rights should be overridden, such as freedom of speech in the classroom. Prima-facie rights can be overridden if conditions are just (Beckner, 2004). In this situation, the human rights of the discontent students may be violated with the action of the proprietor. Students have the human right to freedom of expression and thought. In regard to rights of freedom, there are consequences for an individual's actions and often educators must limit the rights of a student when the student's actions are harmful to the rights of other students. However, in this situation, the students have the responsibility and moral obligation to state the wrongdoing of the proprietor. The proprietor did not use ethical analysis as part of her decision-making process (Beckner, 2004).

Ethical Situation 2
The proprietor and prominent leader of the college told a member of the Board of Directors, who is close friends with the proprietor and prominent leader, to visit and observe administration for nearly four months. The member of the Board of Directors took notes and wrote a report of administrations actions and behavior for the proprietor of the college. In this situation, the proprietor did not use ethical analysis in her decision-making process. The act of sending in the member of the Board of Directors to spy on employees violates their right to privacy. Employers do have the right to determine working conditions and productivity requirements; however, there are better ways to resolve these issues than to have someone watch employees' every move. Employee responsibility includes loyalty to the organization and maintains the responsibility to report any wrongdoing (Beckner, 2004). The proprietor in this case should trust her employees to perform their job.

Ethical Situation 3
The proprietors of the college had a desire to build a new clinic. The design for the new clinic was approved by the city but instead of moving forward with the approved design, the proprietors initiated a new design that did not have the city's approval to build. The proprietors of the college did not utilize ethical analysis as part of their decision-making process. The proprietors are role models and as such have a moral duty and a professional responsibility within the college and in the community, violating a city ordinance to have building permits is wrong (Beckner, 2004).

Ethical Situation 4
The proprietors of the college, upon requests from students and potential students, decided to install an herb garden and greenhouse on the college campus. The proprietors made new fliers and brochures with their intent; however, it has been three years and the herb garden and greenhouse still do not exist on campus. The students maintain a great dismay on the inability of the proprietors to follow through on their promise.
In this situation, ethical analysis was not part of the decision-making process. The proprietors promised current and potential students the herb garden and greenhouse in an attempt to keep and obtain students. The students now have the particular right to receive the herb garden and greenhouse as promised by the proprietors (Beckner, 2004). The proprietors do maintain an ethical duty to the students and the college and have an obligation to promote the best interest of the college. Promising students and not following through on those promises is not ethical.

Ethical Situation 5
The proprietor maintains a camera system throughout the college campus to monitor students, faculty and administrators. Disagreements between autonomy and authority present numerous challenging situations concerning rights. Employees do maintain the right to privacy, but employers have the professional responsibility of employee security. Employers also bear the particular right to determine working conditions and the productivity requirements of their employees (Beckner, 2004). Individuals do not like to be watched all the time, and thus an ethical dilemma arises with the cameras that monitor the students, faculty, and administrators on campus.

The problem is not so much with the cameras, which do provide safety on campus; however, the problem is that the proprietors of the college use the cameras to monitor the employees' productivity. The cameras constantly monitor faculty, students, and other visitors to the office. The proprietors have called employees while someone is in the office; they know this from the cameras, to inquire about why that person is in the office. Employees have a hard time carrying out their roles when attempting to validate one's concerns when the phone rings in the middle of a conversation. The proprietors soon show up in the office to talk to the individual that came to speak to a specific employee. This part is unethical, using the cameras as a tool to keep employees, faculty and students from talking openly and freely between each other.

Ethical Situation 6
The proprietor of the campus often expresses the release of bonuses to employees for meeting certain goals. No matter if the goals or met or even exceeded, the bonuses are never paid to employees. In this situation, the proprietor is infringing on the particular rights of employees. Employees who are promised bonuses have the right to receive them as long as all of the conditions are met (Beckner, 2004). The proprietor has not used ethical analysis in her decision not to give bonuses that were promised

Ethical Situation 7
The proprietor frequently hires faculty from China using the college as the sponsor for work in the United States. The proprietor stipulates that faculty members from China must teach ten or more courses per trimester. In addition, the faculty members from China maintain a salary; courses are taken away from other faculty members to teach so faculty members from China can teach them so the proprietors do not have to pay extra money to other faculty members. This causes a lot of friction between faculty and school leaders.

Employee responsibility is generally thought to involve devotion to the organization and to colleagues. However, responsibility might involve the moral obligation to report wrongdoing by other colleagues and administration (Beckner, 2004). Administrators are supposed to support all faculty members. This is the ethical dilemma in this situation. The proprietors support the faculty from China and taunt them with their working visas if the faculty from China does not do as they are told. The proprietors put themselves in this ethical dilemma but do not see their actions as such. The proprietors should enact procedural justice where all faculty members are treated the same and abide by the same rules. The unequal treatment of faculty members is definitely an injustice at this college. (Beckner, 2004). In addition, faculty members should have an equal opportunity to teach the courses that they were hired to teach. To favor one set of faculty members over another is discrimination and unethical.

Conclusion
As can be determined by the preceding ethical situations the proprietor within this organization does not habitually use ethical analysis for decision-making. As individuals attempt to determine solutions to issues or the optimal course of action to proceed with when faced with a dilemma, there may not be a certain method of continuously reaching the optimal conclusion, or the optimal means to proceed (Beckner, 2004).

References

Beckner, W. (2004). Ethics for educational leaders. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Borrello, A. (2005). Defining the building blocks of ethics. Law & Order, 53. Retrieved
April 8, 2007 from ProQuest database.