Question

• Choose one of the following real-life cases involving an ethical dilemma:
  • Betty Vinson from WorldCom
  • Jeffrey Skilling at Enron
  • Michael Vines at HealthSouth
• Part one: Clearly describe the main ethical dilemma facing the decision maker you have chosen. You may want to describe how or why the dilemma arose.
• Part two: Describe what the decision-maker ACTUALLY did, and the Kohlberg stage that the decision-maker was acting at and why it applies. Then delineate the positive and negative consequences that arose or may have arisen from that choice. These should be done as headers with bullet points, for clarity.   
• Part three: Identify a different possible course of action that could have been taken, and the Kohlberg stage that would lead to that choice.
  Again, bullet multiple positive and negative consequences for the individual--this time making sure that you include consequences for the company and the relevant stakeholders.
• Part four: Identify a second possible course of action that could have been taken. Continue with the same requirements as Paragraph three.
• Part five (and six)--OPTIONAL--add additional courses of action and analyze as above
• Part seven: Discuss briefly what YOU would do in the situation and why (based on Kohlberg and other considerations). Write a concluding sentence that summarizes the theme of your paper.

Answer 1

I believe that corporate employees working within the confines and rules of the organization, have all the tools required to act ethically. When an individual is asked to do something that they may even suspect would be detrimental to their livelihood, then they have all the rights given to them to not follow through with that action.
In the case of Betty Vinson of WorldCom, while she had the clear understanding that her actions were wrong, she clearly kept personal financial safety ahead of her moral and ethical standards. This eventually translated into an even more detrimental result, which was jail time. She clearly did not have a fully developed moral compass, which would have prompted her to either refuse to make the fraudulent.

I believe that the governing laws of WorldCom did not withhold her from saying “no” and proceeding to look for another career option. I think what may have stopped her from doing so, besides her personal financial worries, was the fact that the corporate culture at WorldCom was shaped by the top two executives, CEO Bernie Ebbers and CFO Scott Sullivan. Their leadership style was very hierarchical and autocratic. The notion of do as told and do not question your superiors permeated the workplace environment.

Ebbers had total control in the indoctrination of the corporate culture from the lowest ranks of the line employee all the way to top management and the Board of Directors. This gave him great latitude to pursue self-serving interests. Ultimately Ebbers shaped the morals of each employee in order to meet his requirements of high revenue performance and meeting financial targets. WorldCom’s culture dictated individuals’ morals and ideologies rather than the employee’s morals shaping the company. Having said that, one can conclude that Ms. Vinson had been pulled into the corporate culture that Ebbers pushed, and she therefore almost had no choice but to follow his requests and be a “team player”.