Orangeworks: Using Ferrell’s Framework
ORANGEWORKS: USING FERRELL’S FRAMEWORK SUGGESTS SAMARIN SHOULD BECOME A WHISTLEBLOWER
Samarin is in an ethically challenging position and has four options. He can ignore the information he has found, he can confront the owners, he can quit his job in protest, or he can become a whistle-blower and contact either the media or the authorities. Samarin’s best option is to do the latter.
Ethical Issue Intensity
Samarin should blow the whistle on his employer now because the ethical issue intensity has spiked. Unlike the company’s earlier fraudulent actions, the new evidence affects him in a very direct way, increasing how important and relevant this ethical issue is to him. Samarin thought to himself, “We’re not covered… If I had fallen and broke my neck while changing light bulbs… I would have been finished.” Now that Samarin knows he is not insured in the case of a workplace accident this an immediate concern
Samarin feels compelled to act because of the increased intensity. He became obsessed with the ethical dilemma and placed it at the top of his priorities. He left his work and took an extended break when the intensity increased. He was so concerned with addressing his ethical issue that he did not notice how cold it was outside. His final thought in the article “He had a lot to think about” indicated he would dedicate his mental energy to tackle this issue.
Individual Factors
Samarin’s personal moral philosophy is being challenged. Samarin knows that fraud is inherently wrong and illegal. During the implementation of the “warez,” Samarin knew he was doing something unethical; however, he was able to justify his action by shifting his value structure in order to please his new employer. While Samarin was financially rewarded for his work, no effort was made by the company’s founders to acquire software licence agreements. Samarin did not express any further concerns regarding the “warez” software until he discovered evidence that the company
Samarin is in an ethically challenging position and has four options. He can ignore the information he has found, he can confront the owners, he can quit his job in protest, or he can become a whistle-blower and contact either the media or the authorities. Samarin’s best option is to do the latter.
Ethical Issue Intensity
Samarin should blow the whistle on his employer now because the ethical issue intensity has spiked. Unlike the company’s earlier fraudulent actions, the new evidence affects him in a very direct way, increasing how important and relevant this ethical issue is to him. Samarin thought to himself, “We’re not covered… If I had fallen and broke my neck while changing light bulbs… I would have been finished.” Now that Samarin knows he is not insured in the case of a workplace accident this an immediate concern
Samarin feels compelled to act because of the increased intensity. He became obsessed with the ethical dilemma and placed it at the top of his priorities. He left his work and took an extended break when the intensity increased. He was so concerned with addressing his ethical issue that he did not notice how cold it was outside. His final thought in the article “He had a lot to think about” indicated he would dedicate his mental energy to tackle this issue.
Individual Factors
Samarin’s personal moral philosophy is being challenged. Samarin knows that fraud is inherently wrong and illegal. During the implementation of the “warez,” Samarin knew he was doing something unethical; however, he was able to justify his action by shifting his value structure in order to please his new employer. While Samarin was financially rewarded for his work, no effort was made by the company’s founders to acquire software licence agreements. Samarin did not express any further concerns regarding the “warez” software until he discovered evidence that the company