VP Global Sales MyBigIdea Case Study

VPGlobal Sales: MyBigIdea Case Study

VPGlobal Sales: MyBigIdea Case Study

Facts

Thecase involves a conflict between the CEO, who have a fiduciaryresponsibility to ensure the company hires the best candidates whileensuring that the company policies are implemented, and Steve, whohave been given the responsibility of selecting the best candidate tofill the position of vice president of global sales. The CEO is in adilemma, contemplating on whether to recruit a woman in order toimplement the company’s policy of gender diversity or recruit amale candidate who is more qualified. Therefore, the key factssurrounding the case include the responsibilities to recruit on meritand observe the company policies.

Ethicalissues

Thereare two major ethical issues in the case of MyBigIdea. First, the CEOwould be expected to hire candidates on the basis of equalopportunity instead of their gender or other social characteristic.Secondly, any decision, either hiring a male or a female candidate,will harm at least one stakeholder, which presents the CEO with anethical dilemma.

Stakeholders

1.Investors: They are interested in the candidate who will increasetheir income and return on investment.

2.Owners: Owners of MyBigIdea are interested in a candidate who willincrease profitability, growth, market standing, and market share ofthe company.

3.Employees: The interests of employees may include respect, effectiveand fair recruitment policies, and truthful communication.

4.Customers: They may be interested in a candidate who will enhance thequality of services, offer ethical services, and care for them.

Alternatives

Alternative1: Accept Steve’s recommendation, which is based on merit and anequal opportunity.

Alternative2: Ignore Steve’s recommendation and recruit the female candidate,in order to implement company’s policy for gender diversity.

Impactson shareholders

Alternativeone involves the acceptance of Steve’s recommendation, whichrequires the company to recruit a male candidate because he is themost qualified.

Stakeholder1: Recruiting a more qualified candidate, who is male, will increasereturn on investment, which is in the best interest of investors.

Stakeholder2: A more experienced candidate will increase the profitability ofthe company since he has global network, which will serve theinterests of the company owners.

Stakeholder3: Employees are interested in the better performance of theorganization, which means that they might be pleased with therecruitment of the most qualified candidates. However, femaleemployees might feel displeased with such a decision since thecompany has a policy requiring it to enhance gender equalityprogressively.

Stakeholder4: Recruiting the most qualified candidates will enhance thecompany’s ability to serve the interests of customers, who areinterested in quality and ethical services.

Alternativetwo requires the CEO to ignore Steve’s recommendation and recruitthe female candidate in order to respect and implement the company’spolicy the gender diversity.

Stakeholder1: Recruiting a candidate on gender basis may not necessarilyincrease return on investment, which will disappoint investors.

Stakeholder2: Recruiting the female candidate, who do not have global networkswill deny owners the opportunity to enjoy an increase inprofitability of their company.

Stakeholder3: Recruiting the female candidate may please female employees.However, employees who interested in options that will maximizeprofitability for better pay in the future might feel disappointed.

Stakeholder4: Recruiting the female candidate will deny customers chance toenjoy the services of the most qualified candidates, who knows how toestablish networks with customers.

Discussionand analysis drawing on ethical theories

Ethicalegoism: Ethicalegoism requires the decision makers tom maximize the self-interest(Rainbow, 2012). In the case of MyBigIdea, it would be difficult todetermine which alternative will maximize his interest since each ofthem will create some conflict with one or more category ofstakeholders.

Utilitarianism:Utilitariantheory requires the decision maker to select an alternative thatenhances the happiness of the majority (Rainbow, 2012). From theabove analysis, the recruitment of the male candidate, who hasextensive global networks, will enhance the happiness of allstakeholders, apart from the female employees.

Categoricalimperative: Thisperspective requires decision makers to take alternatives that can beconsidered to be the universal law (Rainbow, 2012).

Alternative1: The decision to select a candidate on the basis of thequalification for a given position can be regarded as an absoluterequirement that should be observed in all conditions and it can beconsidered to be an end itself.

Alternative2: Recruiting a candidate depending gender is a conditionalrequirement that cannot be regarded as a universal law to guide thecompany in the future recruitment exercise.

Distributivejustice:This perspective supports equality in the distribution of resources(Rainbow, 2012). In the case of MyBigIdea, the theory of distributivejustice would favor the recruitment of the female candidate in orderto enhance equality in the distribution of top jobs. Recruiting amale candidate, on the other hand, would enhance the domination ofmale executives in the top rank jobs.

Virtueethics:This perspective requires decision makers to take alternatives thatare consistent with their respective characters, instead of pursuingreputation (Rainbow, 2012). From the case study, the CEO hasdemonstrated his dedication to enhance gender diversity and statedthat “We will bring on qualified female executive members even ifthere are other more qualified male candidates&quot (2). Therefore,the CEO’s virtue of fairness is likely to direct him to recruit thefemale candidate.

Decision

Thedecision on the best alternative can be based on the key theories andthe impact of each alternative on the stakeholders. The firstalternative, recruiting the male candidate on the merit basis, have apositive impact on all stakeholders (including investors, owners, andcustomers), apart from the female employees. The second alternative,recruiting the female candidate on the basis of her gender, have anegative impact on all stakeholders apart from the female employees.Three theories (including the utilitarian, categorical imperative,and virtue ethics) favor the recruitment of the male candidate onetheory (distributive justice) favors the recruitment of femalecandidate and one theory (ethical egoism) does not lead to anyspecific alternative. Therefore, the CEO should go for the firstalternative, which is the recruitment of the male candidate since heis more qualified than the female candidate. This means that therecruitment should be based on qualification instead of the socialcharacteristics of individual candidates.

References

Posadzki,A. (2015). Morewomen at top in big firms.Toronto: The Canadian Press.

Rainbow,C. (2012). Descriptionsof ethical theories and principles.Davidson, NC: Davidson College.