Challenger Ethical Dilemmas

I would write down the actual occurred time on the cash deposits; and explain to Alex that I felt uncomfortable about eating time. If situation plays out, I will try to talk to Dianne to explain her the situation and apologize for the mistake I made. I will assure her that next time I will be more competent on

People from all walks of life face many ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas have consequences. Our worldview determines how we deal with these dilemmas, and guides us to the right decisions. In this essay, I will examine an ethical issues through my Christian worldview. I will also present other viewpoints, and compare them to mine.

This paper explores how ethical issues of Pinto case have affected the Ford Motor Company business environment. A number of factors suggest that Ford Motor Company was negligent and violated its code of ethics. In this paper, we will review the corporate culture mindset which prioritizes profit over the value of human life for the purpose financial gain.

Ethics and moral obligations are issues we all encounter at one time or another. In the professional setting, all people should act in a manner that would uphold the good of society. To be ethical, one has to determine their obligations, moral ideas, and moral philosophy (Boatright, p. 19, 2009). The case analysis involving Jacob Franklin was a perfect example of how an individual can face the dilemma of doing what is right or wrong. Businesses have their own code of ethics, and the employees within the business have to determine whether or not they will follow the company’s code of conduct. I will discuss several ethical issues in the case analysis including; failure to report information, remaining silent regarding faulty equipment,

B. What position in the ValuJet organization did Sabretech fill, why was this a problem? If this were your company would you have used them? ValuJet hire Sabretech, owned by Sabreliner, and licensed by the FAA to perform critical work. If I was a manager for this company I wouldn’t of hire Sabretech. By looking at Sabretech I can see that they were lacking an ethical structure. A Structure that should represent various systems, position, and programs of a company to encourage and support ethical behavior. Such as whistle-blowing an employee disclosure of illegal, unethical practices. By encouraging whistle-blowing employees would not delay in telling regulatory agencies. Perhaps in helping avoid any future tragedy like this one.

Many companies have ethical decisions that need to be and sometimes those decisions can affect many individuals or just a few. Making ethical decisions may be placed solely on one person’s shoulders or it may be a decision that multiple individuals must be involved in. There are several ethical issues in the Richardson Drilling case that should be considered. For instance, bribery, purchasing substandard parts with lack of disclosure that causes injuries, and revealing sensitive information. One potential ethical concern that could arise has to do with ongoing health insurance and the employer’s responsibility.

In addition, the grandmother’s use of gender roles is unsuccessful when trying to persuade the Misfit because the Misfit is vengeful person who is taking retaliation for the injustice he experienced. She places too much trust into the Misfit believing that he “won’t shoot a lady, would you?” (7) because of the men’s gender roles: men are taught not to harm a lady. However, the grandmother disregards the injustice the Misfit experienced which is the reason for her lack of logic when using gender roles as an argument. It is highly possible the Misfit is killing others so they can experience the unfairness he experienced. By conducting these misdemeanors such as murdering a family, he feels compensation for the iniquitousness the American justice

The Categorical theory is ethical only if it is acceptable for everyone to put into practice. Yes, if this scandal was not brought to the attention of the Boeing and the U.S. Attorneys they may have gotten away with it. Pulling in the other direction, if everyone lied on bidding contracts and favored their each other the world would be in chaos. These two theories are contradictory and leave you to ponder if they are right or wrong, while the categorical theory proves to be unethical. The pull from the virtue theory challenges Boeing's leadership to change the culture that allowed violations to occur and to handle the problem before it’s too late. Ethics and compliance are all of our responsibilities as the company motto vs. of the unwritten code of silence and the good old boy motto. The golden rule establishes a culture that ensures that there is no next time because if there not careful it can happen again.

Ethical theory will be outlined in relation to the example case with discussion on how the case poses an ethical dilemma in the workplace. Additionally ethical theory will be considered in light of the case with

Second, it was every engineer’s responsibility to contact relevant officials on the matter. They should have “cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information [and provided] assistance as may be required” (Ethics Code II. 1. f.). Third, there is an ethics violation when the recommendation to launch is passed along without engineer support and signature. According to the Ethics Code, in section II. 2. B., “Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control.” Thiokol’s management ignored this code and misrepresented the dissent among the qualified engineers (Texas A&M University 5).

Despite the Chrysler Bailout and Challenger Disaster being distinct situations, both required a judgmental decision-making approach. The lack of this approach in the Challenger disaster could be attributed to the fact that the face of failure was invisible to the decision makers compared to the Chrysler Bailout. The highest Chrysler’s sales numbers indicated to the decision makers that if a swift and effective decision was not implemented their existence would be short-lived. The highest level of managers at NASA had no idea of the engineer’s concerns about the Challenger.

The Challenger disaster was not only a disaster in terms of the destruction of the spacecraft and the death of its crew but also in terms of the decision-making process that led to the launch and in terms of the subsequent investigation into the "causes" of the disaster. The decision to recommend for launch was made by lower-level management officials over the objections of technical experts who opposed the launch under the environmental conditions that existed on the launch pad at the time. Furthermore, the lower-level managers who made this decision--both NASA and contractor personnel--chose not to report the objections of the technical experts in their recommendations to higher levels in the management chain- of-command to

Throughout history, there have been many different cases in which businesses have made unethical decisions that have caused profound consequences. One of those cases had to do with the Ford Motor Company, and their Ford pinto vehicle. In the year 1968, Lee Iacocca along with other executives decided to manufacture and produce the Ford Pinto model to be sold to the public (Shaw & Barry, 2001). Knowing of a defect in the fuel tank, they still decided to provide their product to consumers in the market (Shaw & Barry, 2001).

Unfortunately, there is always risk when it comes to space flight. This makes it difficult to determine what constitutes an “Acceptable” risk. A space agency has many worries such as their reputation with the public and the world, the success of their missions, and most importantly the lives of their staff and astronauts. Engineers are usually technically gifted but lacking in organization. This spawns a need for non-technical managers to oversee the day to day operations of projects and companies. While the engineers worry about the functionality of the project (in this case, a space shuttle), the managers worry about the cost to the company and the infamous pick 2 triangle of good, cheap, fast. This causes a disconnect between the engineers and the management where pressure from anything whether it be the public or CEO, can cause concerns to be overlooked.

The material was kept at the lowers levels of the decision making process (“The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster,” n.d.). This infringes upon NSPE Code II.3.1. It states, “Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it was current” (“Code of Ethics,” n.d.). The information regarding the hazardous temperatures was applicable to the arrangement of the launch, and it was not reported to levels I or II at NASA management (“The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster,” n.d.).