Example of the scaffold plank incident case study

There was no much work available because of too much ice covering the ground. When Bob received an order from a customer requiring them to supply 600 pieces of 3 x 12 Doug fir-rough-sawn-2 and per thousand board feet, it brought hope since the pay was incentive based. He confirmed the order without checking whether the client needed normal prank wood than the scaffold. When he called the client (Stan) to clarify the problem he was faced by an ethical dilemma since Stan urged him to go ahead and fulfill the order since the client was budget tight. He also insisted that the client would not be able to distinguish between the two and this meant that he would not discover the lie. When he talked with John White he was of the same opinion since he had repeated the same practice over a period of time. He insisted that it was their responsibility to supply the timber to the client as the company needed to keep on running because many people are depends on it to survive. This would be going against his ethics since it was their moral duty to supply what the end user needed.
The stakeholders in the decision making process are his Coworker John White and he believes that he is no police and that they should provide the timber to the customer. He believes that the process of delivering the timber to the end user is long and passes through the hands of many and therefore all they can do is trust that they behave ethically. He believes that he has more experience in the business than Bob has and therefore he can make a more informed decision without involving ethics. Stan on the other hand believes that the customer does not have the ability to differentiate between the varieties that are available furthermore they serve the purpose he needs them to. He also adds that he is constrained in terms of costs and therefore the price is just right for him and they should supply the timber despite them not being Scaffold. The foreman at the end purchaser needs a product that is safe for him to use since the timber is used in places of high risk.
Bob’s decision to quit would mean the loss of the job for the many employees that rely on the company for survival. Steve and Janet would lose their job which is the only source of their livelihood. He would cause suffering to the people and their families by doing so. Moreover, if Bob ignored the problem it would mean that he put in danger the end user of the product as he would use it for the purpose it was intended for. It would mean him going against all the morals he was taught in school and, those that he had learnt to believe in overtime.
Bob Hopkins should trust his instinct and not agree to be a part of the shady deal. This is because if he approves the quotation it would greatly put the life of the end user in great danger. He would never be able to live with the guilt of going against what he had leant to believe as a morally upright procedure. Agreeing to be involved would set him down a road that he would not want to go through since there would be no turning back.