Scribd
Upload
4K views4 pages

To Let Go or To Let Live: The Case of Malou

This document presents a case dilemma involving an employee, Malou, who misappropriated company funds due to financial difficulties. The narrator, who is filling in as department head, must advise their boss on the best course of action. Three options are outlined: 1) Punish Malou, 2) Privately warn Malou but let the matter pass, or 3) Notify the boss of Malou's situation and allow her to take responsibility while also receiving support. Most stakeholders' interests are positively impacted by the third option, as it upholds integrity while showing empathy towards Malou's circumstances. Therefore, the narrator determines the third option is the best approach.

Uploaded by

Dominic Romero
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
4K views4 pages

To Let Go or To Let Live: The Case of Malou

This document presents a case dilemma involving an employee, Malou, who misappropriated company funds due to financial difficulties. The narrator, who is filling in as department head, must advise their boss on the best course of action. Three options are outlined: 1) Punish Malou, 2) Privately warn Malou but let the matter pass, or 3) Notify the boss of Malou's situation and allow her to take responsibility while also receiving support. Most stakeholders' interests are positively impacted by the third option, as it upholds integrity while showing empathy towards Malou's circumstances. Therefore, the narrator determines the third option is the best approach.

Uploaded by

Dominic Romero
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

To Let Go or To Let Live: The Case of Malou

I. Gather the FACTS

 I am a Marketing Personnel of a reputable institution in Makati


 Got appointed as head of our department pro tempore
 Malou withheld money that was supposed to be for the company and its
client/s
 Malou confided in me about her financial problems with regards to paying
debts and providing for her family's well-being after being left behind by her
husband
 Boss asked me what to do about Malou if I were in my boss' shoes

II. Who are the STAKEHOLDERS?

 Me
 Reputation in the Institution
 Friendship with Malou
 Trust built in the Workplace
 Boss
 Profit Maximization
 Workplace Integrity
 Client Protection and Satisfaction
 Malou
 Children
 Job
 Self
 Client
 Money/Debt
 Opinion about the Institution

III. Articulate the DILEMMA

The reputation and trust I earned from working 3 years in the institution and my
friendship with Malou vs Malou's financial problem and emotional state vs Boss
upholding the integrity of his institution and protecting and satisfying the client vs
Client’s money and thoughts about the institution he/she transacted with
IV. List the ALTERNATIVES

Option 1: Confront Malou and punish her for her wrongdoings


This is the route where I, being the Department head pro tempore, tell my boss
that if I were in his shoes, I would not let the case go and instead punish Malou for
the wrong she committed against the institution and have her apologize to the
client. It is then up to the boss whether he lets Malou keep her job and give her a
warning or remove her from her post. The client will be briefed on why the
institution’s transaction went badly (about the employee wrongdoing) and will be
promised that it would never happen again, as the employee which caused it will
either be warned or removed.

Option 2: Notify Malou and let her wrongdoings pass


This is the route where I tell my boss that I would tell Malou that her wrongdoing
was caught and that she must remember not to do it again or else she would be
facing consequences such as job loss or court hearing due to breach of contract. I
would then let the case go to avoid unnecessary trouble. I would also inform the
client that it was just an employee’s mistake which led to the transaction going
badly and that the same thing will never happen again.

Option 3: Notify the boss of Malou’s situation and let Malou and I take
responsibility
This is the route where I tell my boss about why Malou did the things she did and
have her take responsibility for her wrongdoing. This means that I would be giving
her a chance to redeem herself but would also put her in a probation period. I
would have her apologize to the client and confess her wrongdoing but would also
use my position to help her in any way possible in keeping her job. I will tell her
that she should confide in either me or the boss if she has any concern with
finances so that the boss and I could think of a way to have her get an “advance.”

V. Compare the Alternatives with the PRINCIPLES

Option 1
 My reputation and trust in the institution would be kept (+Me)
 Workplace integrity will be upheld (+Boss)
 Client Protection and Satisfaction is in effect (+Boss)
 Profit Maximization will be met (+Boss)
 Client’s transaction would go smoothly (+Client)
 Client’s opinion about the institution would be good (+Client)

Option 2
 My friendship with Malou would be safe (+Me)
 Malou will get to keep her job (+Malou)
 Malou will be able to continue to provide for her children (+Malou)
 Malou’s emotional state will not be tested/bothered (+Malou)
 Client’s transaction would be fixed (+Client)
Option 3
 My reputation and trust in the institution would be kept (+Me)
 Workplace integrity will be upheld (+Boss)
 Client Protection and Satisfaction is in effect (+Boss)
 Client’s transaction would be fixed (+Client)
 Client’s opinion about the institution would be okay (+Client)
 My friendship with Malou would be strengthened (+Me)
 Malou will be able to continue to provide for her children (+Malou)
 Malou’s emotional state will be tested then fixed (+Malou)

VI. Weigh the CONSEQUENCES

*Positive Effects towards the stakeholders are shown above; Negative Effects are
shown below

Option 1
 My friendship with Malou will be compromised due to guilt (-Me)
 Malou’s children may not be provided for anymore (-Malou)
 Malou might lose her job or get lesser pay (-Malou)
 Malou’s emotional state would be attacked due to loss of job or lesser pay, all
while healing from the breakup from husband (-Malou)

Option 2
 My reputation and trust in the institution may be compromised from bias (-
Me)
 There will be losses due to Malou’s actions (-Boss)
 The workplace integrity was breached and may be abused (-Boss)
 Preferential treatment towards employees reduces client satisfaction (-Boss)
 Client’s opinion of the institution would be bad and may tarnish the reputation
of the institution (-Client)

Option 3
 There will be minimal losses due to Malou’s actions – only minimal due to my
intervention (-Boss)
 Malou’s salary may be compromised (-Malou)

VII. Make a DECISION

Out of the 3 options shown above (other alternatives one may think of would just
fall under either of the 3 I stated above), OPTION 3 is the best way to go. It
benefits most of the values/principles of the stakeholders, especially to the primary
stakeholder, and it is also the one with the least negative effects on to the
stakeholders. Moreover, it is not only logical but a “moral” thing to do too due to
showing human emotion of empathy and consideration towards Malou.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy