Professionalism, Ethics, and Regulation, Case Study Example

I was working as an account assistant when a customer approached my desk with a complaint related to unauthorized payments through her account. My desk only allowed me access to accounts’ summary, meaning that I was not privy to mixed and linked accounts. I forwarded the case to my superior, but the client insisted that I and other junior employees conspired to rob our clients. Since she insisted that I was responsible, I called my manager to my desk, who then accessed her account only to discover an account which bore a similar surname.

The situation raised ethical concerns since the client challenged me as an individual and as a professional. Distinction between the two is often impossible since an individual deliberates on the two without external influence. As a professional, I was not allowed to be dismissive, arrogant or violent. I was satisfied with my reaction to the insults in calling the manager to settle the situation. However, the incidence compromised a value I try to conform to; I always endeavor to ensure to solve all of the customers’ issues at my desk. In consideration of the sensitivity of the situation, I was satisfied with my decision even though it compromised one of my values.

Through the manager’s rights, we determined that the client’s account had been linked to one of her daughters’ online account. Consequently, the daughter’s online purchases were deducted from the client’s account. The situation was amicably settled, but the client further wanted a refund on the grounds that she did not authorize the transactions. The manager reminded her of the terms and conditions from downloading an online banking app through her phone. The bank was not responsible for transactions made through her phone when they did not raise flags in the bank’s security system. In a reoccurrence of the incidence, I would ask the client if she has subscribed to online banking. However, I would similarly involve the manage to validate the transactions.

Lesson from the Experience

Success during the incidence was motivated by the involvement of the manager who introduced another perspective. The intervention by the manager aided the precarious situation by demonstrating to the client the source of the problem. From this, I learned that external influence is necessary when individual judgment is limited. Seeking help from other professionals follows a research that argues in favor of ethical implications’ analysis towards increasing moral awareness (Schwartz, 2016, p. 770). The involvement of a superior leader in an ethical decision posing significant threat follows the realization that managers’ decisions aim at maximizing societal well-being (Noval & Stahl, 2017, p. 590). In the future, I would only appeal to managerial help when I perceive a significant corporate threat from an ethical decision. Managers’ perspectives are objective since my decision may be limited by personal feelings such as feelings of hurt from abuse.

Reflection

Kohlberg’s theory on ethical development best reiterates my decision following the abusive client incident. Kohlberg argues that an individual is naturally predisposed to making decisions based on what they perceive as right and wrong independent of culture and society (Chartered Banker, 2016, p. 260). I did not understand the cause of the unauthorized transactions which compelled me to doubt the security features of the bank. From the possibility of fault from the bank, I consulted the bank manager, even though I was at will to dismiss the client for hurling insults at me.

Steare’s ethical thinking model is based on the moral DNA concept. Steare argues that the decisions made conform to people’s moral concepts, thereby allowing compliant, ethical thinking (Chartered Banker, 2016, p. 265). Compliance ethical thinking allows individuals the benefit of making decisions based on social perspectives such as respect for the rule of law. Knights (2016, p. 4) further argues that ethical decision-making relies on rational thinking which is then influenced by sub-conscious intuition and instinct. The argument elaborates my decision to call my superior in consideration of customer service compliance. Lack of knowledge on the issue required instincts, which compelled me to involve the manager.

Ethical decision-making model Application

The consensus theory offers a unique and different approach to ethical dilemmas. The theory focuses on the integration of corporate culture and rules in the development of decisions. In the development of theory, Cyert and March stated that organizations were not enforcers of the objectives but the employees (Chartered Banker, 2016, p. 316). Cyert and March are reputed for establishing that employees should be allowed autonomy in ethical decisions. The two writers’ perspectives were backed by contemporary researchers who argue that dynamic ethical decisions from employees follow the highly flexible social perspectives in firm and service delivery (Wee & Taylor, 2018, p. 9). This autonomy significantly shifts the process of ethical thinking in official capacities.

Following the consensus theory, I would make very different decisions with the client. The theory allows employees autonomy in ethical decisions, thus allowing me the benefit of choosing if I should serve the client. Cyert and March stated that autonomy in ethical decisions followed the susceptibility of corporate rules to disobedience by employees and customers (Gibbons, 2018, p. 5). Based on the client’s disregard for formality in service delivery, I would then be allowed to deny the client service. I would have offered the client an ultimatum; either she calms down and address me with formality or leave the premises.

Lesson from Applying the Model

Ethical dilemmas in banks are associated with corporate culture, which defines people’s reactions. Research in banks identifies a significant gap in banks in the form of ethical dilemmas leading to lawsuits. The consensus theory introduces a unique approach to solving ethical dilemmas with a particular focus on employees. Cyert and March presented that employees needed empowerment, allowing them autonomy in decision-making (Herzog, 2017, p. 154). Autonomy based on situation introduces inconsistencies in ethical decision-making (Hu, et al., 2017, p. 1436). The inconsistencies in decision making promote employees’ ethical thinking towards ensuring corporate success.

Often, decisions are made with regards to an organization’s services and industry. The consensus theory is founded on the perception that decisions are founded on individuals, who are additionally independent of an organization (Knights, 2016, p. 5). This perception shifts responsibility to employees without guidelines on the application of the theory. However, relying on social performance through firm-identifying (FI) stakeholders forms attributes useful in ethical decision-making autonomy (Nason, et al., 2017, p. 4). FI stakeholders develop their identities from an organization’s attributes, thus their use as corporate image. In future, I would rely on my instincts as an FI stakeholder in decision making, per Cyert and March’s argument that goals and information asymmetries determine ethical decisions (Leiblein & Reuer, 2019, p. 3). By consciously analyzing the situation and the possible outcomes, I would make decisions aimed at maximizing a positive outcome.

References

Chartered Banker, 2016. Professionalism, Ethics, and Regulation. 2016/2017 ed. London: BPP Learning Media Ltd.

Gibbons, R., 2018. In Honor of Jim March. Massachusettes Institute of Technology, 1(1), pp. 1-9.

Herzog, L., 2017. Just Financial Markets? Finance in a Just Society. 1 ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hu, S., He, Z.-L., Blettner, D. P. & Bettis, R. A., 2017. Conflict Inside And Outside: Social Comparisons And Attention Shifts In Multidivisional Firms. Strategic Management Journal, Volume 38, pp. 1435-1454.

Knights, J., 2016. How to Develop Ethical Leaders. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, Volume 1, pp. 1-12.

Leiblein, M. J. & Reuer, J., 2019. Foundations and Futures of Strategic Management. Management Review, 1(1), pp. 1-43.

Nason, R. S., Bacq, S. & Gras, D., 2017. A Behavioral Theory Of Social Performance: Social Identity And Stakeholder Expectations. The Academy of Management Review, 43(2), pp. 1-60.

Noval, L. J. & Stahl, G. K., 2017. Accounting for Proscriptive and Prescriptive Morality in the Workplace: The Double-Edged Sword Effect of Mood on Managerial Ethical Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(3), pp. 589-602.

Schwartz, M. S., 2016. Ethical Decision-Making Theory: An Integrated Approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(4), pp. 755-776.

Wee, E. X. & Taylor, S. M., 2018. Attention to change: A multilevel theory on the process of emergent continuous organizational change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(1), pp. 1-13.