Based on this case study, the ethically dubious behaviour exhibited by the NKF is that the fund-raising strategies and tactics were too aggressive and the organization is not fiscally responsible. These marketing practices distort and demean the aim of a charity organization and give the public the perception that it is all for the patients’ benefits while the top management actually made use of the public’s empathy and overspent the funds on administrative and marketing activities. The lack of transparency of how the raised funds are distributed in the organisation to help the patients and the lack of intervention of the government resulted in such perquisite taking actions. Ethical lapses undermine the trust the public holds in the entire organization. As such, the ethical issue present is that misuse of raised funds. To examine this issue in detail, the ethical principles of utilitarianism, deontological ethics and the conventional approach will be considered. Key Stakeholders
In this case, the key stakeholders involved are CEO Durai, donors and patients. The CEO is concerned about raising more funds. By various ways of marketing and branding the non-profit organization aggressively, there is a significant increase in the number of donors, increasing the funds raised and accumulating more reserves. Under the leadership of Durai, there is no doubt empire building in the organization given that there are ’48 departments reporting to the CEO’. Donors want to make sure that their donations are spent on the right areas, especially those with low incomes. While donors make donations to the NKF organization, they may derive other benefits from their contributions such as tax-deductible donations, self-satisfaction, publications and enhance reputation. Patients are supposedly the sole benefiters in the situation since the NKF is set up to help them. Yet, they may not receive as much benefits as they are promised because the organization tends to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document