All papers are checked via
|← Features of Ethics||Ethical Dilemma in Business →|
Business ethics are very essential in the daily running of the business. Business ethics includes the moral obligation to do what is right and just at all times. It seeks to discourage various injustices such as favoritism and greed for money. Strict business ethics also help the workers to stick to company policies and rule of law when discharging their duties. This is because unethical behavior to a customer not only leads to a profit loss, but at times may lead to a legal suit for damage. Therefore, service providers should always implement just and equal decisions to all customers regardless of their race, income status and personal ties. Various theories have continued to be used in the analysis of business ethics and among them include deontology, consequentialism and the virtue ethics theories. This paper will seek to exhaustively analyze the attached case study using the above named theories. The paper will also recommend the probable course of action that the customer should take.
Every company has its own rules and regulations. Such rules are meant to give the company employees guidelines on how to handle their daily tasks. From the case study, the Savoy company policies stipulated that clients ought to book their room’s well-in advance to avoid frustrations and other inconveniences in the actual day of visit. The reservation rights also allowed equal and fair treatment to all clients at all times (Frederic, 2002).This is as stipulated in the deontology also known as Kantianism theory which is more concerned on acting rationally. Paige Lewis who was the front desk agent was required to follow these guidelines when allocating rooms to the various clients. Any deviation from this would amount to unethical behavior. And as the deontology theory suggests, one should not allow personal desires to dictate to dictate his or her decisions, since it is a potential threat to rationality (Graham, 2004). However, Paige allowed her personal desire for money to influence her ethical behavior. Although at first she was hesitant to it, Liz conspiratorial tone made her to finally agree to issue her a room, despite being booked in advance by another client. She therefore failed in her role by employing a self-contradictory policy which favored Liz. Nonetheless, the move contravened with Savoy policy which stipulated that, the hotel is dedicated in honoring clients reservations at all cost. The decision made the rightful owner of the reservation to suffer the inconveniences at midnight which she was trying to avoid by having an advance booking. It also tainted Savoy’s image and reputation as the customer was unhappy with Paige’s decision.
It seems that Paige followed the consequentialism also known as Utilitarianism theory which argues that the end justifies the means. By granting Liz a reservation she, may have considered the rightful thing to do which favored both the hotel and her wants. The theory tends to allow desires to be included in the decision making process. Paige may have considered the past trends in the hotel where not all clients who book for a room reservation finally turns up in the actual day. This together with the bad climatic condition prevailing on that day may have influenced her to think that she was doing right by granting Liz a reservation (Ridley, 1998). According to her the decision may be said to maximize the hotel utility, unlike in a situation when the guest failed to turn up. However, the theory is partially implemented since it failed to consider the need of the woman who had previously reserved that room. But Paige may argue that her appearance was uncertain based on the past reservations trends in the hotel.
Likewise we can analyze Paige’s action using the virtue ethics theory which examines the individual habits attributed by his or her character. From our case study, we notice that Savoy hotel supervisor admired Paige’s work. Therefore, this means that for the last six months that Paige has been working there, she exhibited her proficiency and passion in her work (Murphy, 2002). However, it is unclear to identify whether it was her constant habit to take bribe as she did in order to illegally allocate Liz a room (Graham, 2010). Although she may claim that she did this in consideration of Liz who was equally a hotel client, her take of $50 was not justifiable at any case. And even if it brought happiness to Liz who never bothered to book her reservation in advance, it never did the same to the rightful owner of the room who checked in at midnight (Penslar, 1995).
I would recommend that the hotel should take full responsibility for the rightful owner of the room who checked in at midnight. This should include getting her an alternative reservation even if in another hotel and incurring all the extra charges on it. They may grant her some special offers in order to make peace with her for the inconvenience caused. The management should seek to apologize to this client for their mistakes and should also take a stun action on Paige in order to discourage such behaviors in future. Actions such as suspensions, reshuffle or a complete relief of duty should be undertaken on Paige in order to caution her from repeating the same mistakes in future (Weiss, 2009). The management should also take note of Liz for propagating unethical behavior through bribe, and should issue a stun warning to her in the morning. Such action can effectively work towards stopping her from such behaviors in future.