The ¡§Brush with AIDS¡¨ case discusses the situation involving Halsey¡¦s

The ¡§Brush with back up¡¨ case addresses the situation involving Halsey¡¦s sharps containers. shamd immune deficiency syndrome and HIV infirmitys argon foul and contagious. Hospitals hope to entertain their staff and employees from the dole out of diseases. They manipulation sharps containers from Halsey to forec drift off the spread of disease. There is a business with the Halsey short letter of crossways. The admirer (Amy) in this case has to verbalism an ethical dilemma which forces her to opt mingled with her moral office to protect the customers¡¦ needs from the spreading of the deadly AIDS disease or her obligation to her comp all¡¦s increase performance.         Halsey is a allowing health wish comp each that entrusts the outmatch proceedss and run to customers all around the world. Amy is a senior market bus in the nursing services unit of Halsey health harvests. Her responsibility is to accept the designd har rys and syringes. Amy¡¦s goals are restrictively egregious net utility clam oriented. At Halsey, Amy is committing to making the receipts devise and to attaining the profit tar take hold of her manager set. Amy wants to keep the swinish revenue discharge up and upholding the highest quality and customer services. In 1989, Amy became aware of a serious potential conflict betwixt the sharps containers harvesting line to the hospitals and the risks to the health care workers exploitation it.         Halsey¡¦s sharps containers product are very successful. Their sales adjudge been increase dramatically and Haley¡¦s wants to expand the market. Sharps containers discharge be position in all(prenominal) hospital room to allow for microscope stage of use disposal. With the AIDS frenzy in the hospital and the attention essay to protect its employees, sharps containers products were highly demanded. Therefore, customers are ordaining to pay almo st any price. Amy¡¦s sales were successf! ul and she may be acquire a promotion.         Unfortunately, there is a problem about sharps product. perfect(a) sales reps and customers began complaining about sharps containers. Sharps containers do from fictile were smashing in cold temperatures and those used chivys were able to penetrate the plastic casing. To Amy this problem can be solving easily by intercommunicate hospitals to place sharps containers in room temperature storage to prevent the product from cracking. The needles penetrate the plastic casing because the plastic is non bass enough. Increasing the thickness of the plastic can prevent the needle from penetrating. However, the closing of increasing the plastic thickness risk crumple the product line¡¦s performance and the gross profit target at Halsey. To satisfy customer needs and pascal the question the best products, Halsey sales reps handle the complaint by substitute the broken sharps containers free of charge.         Halsey line of sharps products met the Center for ailment go through (CDC) and the Occupational Safety and Health constitution (OSHA) recommendation in millimeter thickness. Halsey besides met the guidelines and there is no competitive product more heartive product than Halsey. The caller-out also was not at risk for the liability contingencies because their products met the guidelines.         Amy found herself concentrate not on how solve the customer¡¦s problem. Instead, she actively intermeshed in the risk solicitude of gross profit dollar plan. Her yearly base bonus of $ 10,000 would increase by 1% for every 1% she surpass her target. She would not fuck off any bonus if she did not reach the target. Amy knew that improving the product would lead to financial disaster and it would set back her chances for promotion.         Amy¡¦s director, Phil, who is a middle manager had been a successful mover at Halsey fo r 13 years. He is very committed to the troupe and h! e is more touch with profit performance. Phil¡¦s fastness management put him under pressure to show handsome profits. Phil is mass-sensitive to the point that he would try to appease everyone instead of taking a strong stand on the issues. He hides what he unfeignedly intuitive feelings order to make opposite people happy.         Amy became more concerned about the impact of the sharps product failures on the sales force. She came and discussed the issues with Phil. She suggested to Phil that they imbibe an obligation to rectify the product lines. However, Phil did not listen to Amy; he all focused on how the product failure would effect his profit performing. Amy wanted to go at a time to senior management and discuss the serious problem of Halsey¡¦s line of products. However, she was hangdog that talking to the senior management would vilify her on the job(p) kinship with Phil.         Amy has to choose between two altern atives. in one case is to recall for the turn up of the products. Another woof is to do secret code. Amy¡¦s first reception is doing nothing. She could rationalize that none of her competitors were improving their products. Halsey¡¦s line of product met the CDC and OSHA guidelines.

She could engage in damage ascendency by providing excuses to the sales force and to the consumers. She also could pretend nothing happened by finish the year with a profit plan, get her promotion and go away the mess behind. Amy could maintain the working relationship with Phil. She can use the Rights court to argue for her action. The function approach is focused on the individual¡¦s correct to choose, her company impart gull the prof! it but only for a short term.         The other option is to go straightforward to senior management and discuss the problems and product improvement. Amy powerfulness lose her promotion and ruin the working relationship with Phil. In this option, Amy can use the Utilitarian Approach and the commonality satisfactorys Approach. Utilitarian approach is that ethical actions are those that provide the superior balance of skillful over evil; in other words, Amy chooses the action that impart produce the greatest make headway and the least harm. The company might lose its profit in the short-term; however, it bequeath gain the customers trust and profit in the long-term. The Common Good Approach is focused on ensuring that the sociable policies, social systems, institutions and environments on which we depend are beneficial to all. Amy move to improve the sharps containers for the safeguard of the customer and tried to protect the risks to health care worke rs exploitation it.         If I were in Amy shoes, I would choose option 2, to improve the Halsey line of products. I have it off that I might lose promotion and may jeopardize my job. However, I do not want to sell products that I know it result have negative effects in the future. I do not want to see the risks of health care workers utilise the products and the spread of deadly diseases like AIDS and HIV. I provide be wide of the marky responsible for my decision. Therefore, by using the Common Good and Utilitarian Approaches, my ethical decision entrust provides the greatest good for the greatest number.         In conclusion, Amy¡¦s decision on whether or not to improve will have some(prenominal) positive and negative on people or the organization. In any ethical dilemma, any option made will still create losses for various groups. However, the option I choose to execute is the one I feel will most beneficial to society. If you want to get a fu! ll essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay