Answer 1:
i) The relational nature of business in Good Heart Hospital fails because of the management’s unethical decision to award tenders to suppliers based on personal relationships rather than on the ability to provide quality service. Ethics are crucial in maintaining relationships with stakeholders as they determine the level of trust, transparency, and integrity in the organization’s operations. By awarding tenders to Foodbiz and MediMealz due to the CEO’s family relationship, Good Heart Hospital has breached the ethical principles of fairness, impartiality, and integrity.
The relationship between the hospital and stakeholders such as patients, employees, suppliers, and the community is negatively impacted by the use of these sub-standard suppliers. Patients may receive low-quality meals that do not meet their dietary requirements, affecting their overall health and satisfaction with the hospital. Employees may feel demotivated and undervalued if they witness unethical practices such as nepotism in tender awards. Suppliers who were not awarded tenders despite offering better services may lose trust in the hospital’s procurement processes. The community may view Good Heart Hospital as untrustworthy and unreliable, leading to a loss of reputation and support.
ii) For example, patients may experience health issues due to consuming low-quality meals provided by Foodbiz and MediMealz, leading to a decline in their well-being and potentially longer recovery times. Employees may feel disillusioned and demotivated, affecting their productivity and commitment to the hospital. Suppliers who were overlooked for tenders may lose business opportunities and revenue, impacting their financial stability. The community may lose faith in Good Heart Hospital as a healthcare provider, choosing to seek services elsewhere, which could have long-term repercussions on the hospital’s reputation and credibility.
Answer 2:
According to the first practical imperative of deontological ethics, an action is considered ethical if it is based on universalizability – meaning that the action should be acceptable for everyone in a similar situation. In the case of Neo telling a ‘white lie’ to the man in the grey suit, it can be argued that the lie was not ethical.
While Neo may have used tact and diplomacy to avoid trouble and gain information, the act of lying goes against the principle of honesty and integrity. Even though the lie may have seemed insignificant at the time, it sets a precedent for unethical behavior and undermines the trust and credibility of individuals involved in the situation. From a deontological perspective, lying is inherently wrong and cannot be justified, even in situations where the consequences may seem beneficial. Neo’s actions in this scenario would not be considered ethical according to the first practical imperative of deontological ethics.
In relation to ISSUE 4: Procuring sub-standard goods from questionable suppliers Marks: 15Question 1 (12)Consider the information in issue 4 in the case study and the following diagram about the stakeholders who are impacted by the activities of Good Heart Hospital:It is suggested that ethics are an integral dimension of any organisation and its success. Although Good Heart Hospital is a public entity and not a commercial one, it is an ‘organisation’. Therefore it has an ethical dimension that should be inherent to its position in society.Various stakeholders are affected by the operations of Good Heart Hospital as shown in the diagram. In fact, the hospital as organisation relies on the relationships it has with these stakeholders for its success. Organisations after all, consists of people, who ultimately deal with people. Management made the decision to award a tender to Foodbiz (for the supply of meal ingredients) and one to MediMealz (for hospital meal preparation). However, it turned out that both these suppliers provide inferior quality of service, not least because the owner of both businesses are the brother of the hospital’s chief executive officer (CEO). These two companies appear to have been awarded the tenders not because they can provide a proper service, but because of the owner’s (secret) family relationship with the CEO. Accordingly, it is concluded that the management of Good Heart Hospital did not consider ethics when it came to the awarding of the two tenders.Required: i) Discuss in detail how the relational nature of business may fail in Good Heart Hospital because of management’s use of Foodbiz and MediMealz as suppliers. Specifically, your discussion should focus on the importance of ethics in the relationships between Good Heart Hospital and its stakeholders, and how the Foodbiz and MediMealz tenders inflict damage on these relationships.ii) Include in your discussion one example of how each of the stakeholders in the diagram could be negatively impacted because of the hospital making use of these two suppliers.Question 1 is based on the content of Chapter 4 of Business Ethics, Rossouw & van Vuuren, Oxford University Press South Africa, 2023. Question 2 (3)As evident from issue 4 in the case study, Neo told a ‘white lie’ to the man in the grey suit while he was trespassing in the supplier tenders room. A white lie is generally considered to be an unimportant lie that is told for the purpose of either being tactful, or polite. Neo was tactful with the telling of this lie, because it not only got him out of potential trouble, but he could also get away with the knowledge he had about possible tender irregularities. Required: Using the first practical imperative of deontological ethics, discuss whether the lie Neo told could be considered ‘ethical’. Question 1 is based on the content of Chapter 4 of Business Ethics, Rossouw & van Vuuren, Oxford University Press South Africa, 2023.
1 answer