In Wink and Corradino’s article, it is possible to observe how employees may violate ethical standards in pursuing their own interests. In general, the performance of IMA’s members should be based on the principles of fairness, honesty, responsibility, and objectivity. In addition, they should comply with the ethical standards of credibility, competence, integrity, and confidentiality. In particular, members should act professionally in accordance with official regulations, relevant laws, and technical standards, communicating information objectively and fairly. In addition, IMA members should pursue the interests of their companies, contributing to their growth and development.
In the case of a vehicle manufacturing plant and SUVs’ production, it is possible to observe the violation of multiple ethical standards and principles by Gail Smith. First of all, she acted unethically when she aimed to change the rules of internal reporting for personal financial benefits, regardless of the devastating consequences of this action for the company. In addition, she deliberately provided incorrect information to Robert and other managers, manipulating their lack of knowledge or her position as the supervisor.
At the same time, Robert may demonstrate unethical behavior as well. On the one hand, he is competent enough to detect Smith’s unethical intentions. On the other hand, he faced an ethical dilemma and the necessity to choose whether he would remain loyal to the company and pursue its interests in order to mitigate related conflicts or he would be involved in unethical activities together with his supervisor for personal enrichment.
Placed in Robert’s situation, I would not choose the second option due to multiple reasons. First of all, my profit from the manipulations of the company’s internal reporting would not be sufficient enough to cover all my needs for several years in advance, however, my reputation as a competent, fair, and honest specialist would be negatively affected by unethical behavior. It goes without saying that I would have to quit this job, and my opportunities for successful employment in the future could be substantially affected if my participation in fraud was discovered. Thus, in Robert’s place, I would talk with managers about Smith’s unethical behavior. If my words were considered, I would stay in the company, and my competence, knowledge, honesty, and skills will be respected. Moreover, even if my discovery had no effect and I was forced to leave, my reputation would remain unblemished.
At the same time, from a personal perspective, regardless of whether Robert will actively support Smith’s plan or will not agree with her intentions, he will be engaged in unethical activities and will not disclose his findings during the meeting with the company’s managers. First of all, the accountant reflects on his personal benefits, which will be provided by Smith’s behavior. In addition, he doubts his ability to impact managers’ attitudes to the necessity of changes.
Robert supposes that if he openly questions his supervisor’s tactics, no one will believe him due to a lack of work experience, and his job will be at stake. Thus I assume that Robert will not inform managers about his concerns related to Smith’s intentions. On the contrary, he will report the positive dynamics of his performance and mention the necessity of changes in reporting as well. Moreover, he will follow his supervisor’s plan, however, the possibility of his stay in the company remains unclear as the ethical dilemma he faced can make his work unbearable in the future.