In: Economics
Question 3: For this dilemma presented below, consider these questions:
1. What ethical principles are involved in this situation?
2. What are at least two options to consider?
3. What would you do?
You are leading a team of colleagues that will be evaluating program effectiveness of your organization based on achievement of intended outcomes. The primary audience for these evaluation results is the funder for the programs being evaluated. The political grapevine suggests that serious budget cuts will result in the elimination of less-effective programs. In some cases, this funder represents the primary source of the entire agency budget. Your team fears for their jobs if the results are not favorable. As you design the evaluation instrument, you are conflicted about the questions you will ask and the level of rigor you will use. Your name will go on the evaluation report as leader of the team. You sincerely believe in the value of the programs for the individuals and families they serve and have seen firsthand the impacts on their lives. You weren’t happy with the intended outcomes written (hastily in your opinion) by the grant writer who wasn’t very familiar with the actual work.
In the situation stated here me as a team leader worhed hard for getting a good outcome for our study. but the audience who evaluated as was not satisfied with our report. and there arises a problrem of funding issue. so in such a situation i will definetely follow my personal ethics. if iam confident about my work i never be afraid of fundoing and all other thinksassociated with.
1) here there is violation of ethical principles such as respect for others, integrity, promise keeping etc.
each and every one in a society should be given proper care and respect. Trust in a work done by a worker is the most valuable respect that can be given to a employee to make them encouraged to do a work more sincerely.The potential and faith of the work done by the students in the cited situation should give proper respect. They can suggest better methods to make the programm more effective instead of eliminating it. Promise keeping is another main ethics that everyone in an organisation should follow. but in the given situation they rejected the report submitted by the group without giving them a chance to be heard. Thus it an be considered as violation of promise keeping.
2) There are some other options for the leader to convince the funders and go apart with the project. first one is to make correction in their project inorder to recive payment .Ohterwise theycan go ahead with their opinion.Otherwise they could go for better sources of raising fund from public or other related organisatiomns.
3) If i was the leader of the group i will stand in my opinion and work hard to submit my report by utilizing fund from any other resources.. I believe that if we are sincere to our work nobody can stop us from aceiving our goal. so definetelu ther will be some better options waiting for us.