Applying the Moral Intensity Descriptive Framework & Assignment Explanation

Instructions to Students

Seminar Six:  Applying the Moral Intensity Descriptive Framework & Assignment Explanation

Seminar Objectives

To provide the student with an opportunity to practice using the Moral Intensity descriptive ethical framework that is required in the assignment essay.

Any further clarification regarding the SM0381 Assignment will be provided.

Preparation for Seminar

1. Consult the TLP and do the preparatory reading.
2. Please remember to print out this seminar brief and bring it to the seminar.
3. Please make sure that you fully understand the term “whistleblower” in contemporary Western business situations (the anonymous reporting of a company for illegality or dubious ethical practices).

Seminar Activities

Students will:

• Read a brief case study (please do this in advance of the session).
• Analyse it using the Moral Intensity Framework (Jones, 1991).
• Fill in the Moral Intensity Table and estimate the level for each component.
• Take part in a tutor-led plenary session concerning the assignment.

Post Seminar Activities

Complete the assignment by the official deadline.

Directed Reading

Everything previously itemised in the TLP.

CASE STUDY:  Stuck in the middle?  

You have recently been appointed to the position of civil engineer in a small town in a developing country.  You work for a Government Department that is responsible for the maintenance of the town's infrastructure, such as public buildings and roads.  You are one of the youngest members of the senior management team and report directly to the Director of Public Works.  All the members of the management team have been working for the Government for a very long time, and you feel like something of an outsider.

The Director of Public Works, the Human Resources Director, and the CEO often have lunch together, and it is a local joke that “the most important organizational decisions are taken over lunch”.

Your position had been vacant for a long time prior to your appointment and the Director of Public Works had assumed responsibility for a number of your current responsibilities.  On your appointment, your manager asked you consult him on any major decisions before implementing them.  He also retained the authority to approve major works.

After some time, you realized that despite having a full team of permanent staff, a number of outside commercial contractors were still doing various jobs within the organization.  When you queried this, the Director simply put it down ‘our team’s rusty skills', 'a significant backlog', and 'need for high quality of work'.  Strangely, you have been very impressed with the quality of work that your own staff had produced on various small maintenance jobs.  Recently, when you were complimenting one of your supervisors on the way he handled an emergency, he expressed his frustration at being given the 'boring, odd jobs' instead of the 'challenging' projects given to the outside commercial contractors.

You decided to utilize your own staff (rather than contractors) for the next major project because you felt that you would be able to supervise the work better, ensure the right quality and save the cost of expensive outside contractors.  You planned it meticulously and wanted to enlist the support of your manager to ensure that all went well. You prepared all the paperwork and took it to your manager for discussion. He looked disinterested and simply asked you to leave the paperwork with him because he was preparing for a meeting.

The following week, your manager informed you that he had gone through your paperwork, and asked one of the more ‘experienced’ commercial contractors to submit a proposal for the job.  He told you that he had already discussed this issue with the Director of Public Works, because he felt that this was a critical job and the contractors would complete the work within a shorter time than the internal staff.  You were very upset about this, and asked your manager why he had not involved you in the decision-making process. You are increasingly uncomfortable that you are expected to supervise and authorize payments for contractors whose appointment, to you, seems questionable.