Well As Breakfast Services To The Customers-Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Well As Breakfast Services To The Customers? Answer: Introducation I have been working in a restaurant sector for more than five years and have not faced with such situation anytime in the past. The restaurant I work for in involved in offering dining as well as breakfast services to the customers. The restaurant opens in two shifts; one is in the morning and the other in the evening. This kind of shift timing is maintained by the restaurant in order to get ample time for preparing the food items. This in turn helps the restaurant to serve best quality food to the customers. My role in this restaurant is of an operations manager. I look after all the operations in the store that is the kitchen, presentation if food and tables and responsible for maintaining the internal and external environment of the business. Being the operation manager, I was expected to stay the whole day for looking after the restaurant. The raw material for the food and other needs of the restaurant is bought under my supervision. I am the sole person to allow the entry of an item in the store after properly analyzing the quality and environmental considerations. The food is also cooked under my supervision as it is my duty to maintain the power consumption, waste disposal and recycling of waste when required (Montalbo, 2015). A restaurant should have some of these operations ethics for proper maintenance of the environment. As the waste disposed by our store also affects the external environment, being an operations manager it is my duty to supervise that. I handled all the operational responsibility of my store from preparation to waste. However, a few weeks before I got a message from my supervisor that I am not liable to look after the waste disposable duty from today. This was a shock for me as the company just informed me about the changes before prior discussion. It should be an ethical consideration of any business to discuss about any changes in the business before reaching to a decision (Su, 2014). Being a part of the organization and knowing that there must be some genuine reason behind such a decision, I decided to keep quiet and continue the duties I am allotted with. This shows that I followed the stage four of the Kohlbergs Thinking of moral improvement that states about obeying the decision of our authority due to social considerations (Nucci, Krettenauer Narvez, (Eds.)., 2014). I did not question on the decision taken by the restaurant manager due to moral ethics. This is because I was also relaxed that one of my responsibilities was reduced. With the passing time, I realized that due to improper supervision of the waste disposable system, the amount of waste was increasing in the restaurant. Moreover, improper ways of waste disposal was also affecting the external environment. After returning from a leave of two days, I also heard from some staffs working under me that the restaurant is hiring a new operations manager who will be looking for the waste disposal department. This was good news for me, as my responsibility will be fixed in one particular department. However, I was also afraid that this new hiring might be a threat for my position. This is because some of my colleagues also informed me that the new manager is more qualified and experienced than me. One decision by my supervisor or the restaurant manager has put me into two problems. One is being a store operation manager I need to see that the store operations are running smoothly with relation to the cleaning, safety and presentations. Second is the fear of losing my job if the new manager is highly educated. However, with the constraint of not going beyond the decision taken by the head of department, all the staffs in the restaurant was getting affected. A restaurant industrys sole aim is to serve the customers with best quality service and environment irrespective of anything (Huang, et. al., 2014). My operation staffs as well as I were afraid of losing the job with such bad situation of the store. I tried talking about the situation to the store manager about the worsening condition. However, due to some unknown reason he did not give much heed to the issue. In light of moral requirement in business (Weiss, 2014), there are reasons that make this situation a moral dilemma for me as well as for my staffs. This is because the consequences of the action taken by the authorities will affect me as well as my staffs. According to the business environment management, it has been widely recognized that a business is always affected by ethical, environmental and economic considerations (Crane Matten, 2016). Such considerations have to be met in any condition for proper revenue of the business. Moreover, the head manager did not think much before taking this action. He is not bothered that this action is going to affect me, my staffs as well as the reputation of the company. The long-term effect of this might be positive, however, it is presently affecting many people in the company. It becomes my ethical duty to make the authority informed about the situation and its affects. This puts me in stage six of Kohlbergs theory of post-conventional mor ality in which as person acts according to the internal environment principle (Nucci, Krettenauer Narvez, (Eds.)., 2014). In view of the stage five of the Kohlbergs model of morality, it was difficult to reach on any decision about the action that was taken. This is because any decision taken should be a balance between the social need and own rights (Nucci, Krettenauer Narvez, (Eds.)., 2014). I realized that the company was going to benefit in the end with such experienced and qualified operation managers. Thus, it is not wise to directly go and ask about it to the authority. It might happen the head manager has informed the owner of the company before taking any such decision. The decision of the owner is just as he is the maximum stakeholder of the company. Unethical behavior is never accepted in any company and thus would prove to be a threat on my job (Giacalone Promislo, 2014). Unethical behavior is also bad for the business as it might lead to disputes between the management and the staffs, which will in return affect the servicing facility of the restaurant. Thus, it is beneficial that I follow the non-consequential theory of ethics that focuses on rights and integrity. The staffs of the restaurant have the rights to perform effectively and earn well from their job. There are employees who are in their initial stage of career development and such kind of actions will be detrimental to their career if they lose their job. However, raising my voice for their behalf would put my job at risk, as I am uncertain if the head manager took this action on some instruction from the owner of the restaurant. The next option for taking any decision is to follow the Utilitarianism act in consequential ethics (Mulgan, 2014). By following this theory, I will have a discussion with my head manager about the present condition of the restaurant and would try to reach to some kind of compromise that will be beneficial for the entire person affected as well as the company. In doing this I will request my supervisor to allow me to continue with the waste management operation of the business until the new manager joins the company. This will allow the staff to perform their task appropriately and benefit the restaurants environment. On the other hand, I will also have some idea of the view the head manager is holding about my position in the company. This decision will be beneficial for everyone. However, it might also backfire on me as the situation is sensitive and the management did not inform me about it themselves. Final approach that I can take to solve the issue is the egoistic approach (Knez, 2016). This approach usually involves getting our own work done without thinking much about others. I could just focus on completing the task that has been allotted to me without considering much about the staffs and the restaurant surroundings. Performing the task perfectly would help me be in the save side of not losing my job. Although I realize that the staffs also need to earn their living, yet I need to fulfill my own needs to some extent. Based on the above problems and the solutions that I suggested for dealing with that issue I realize that I have moved from one stage to another stage of Kohlbergs theory. I was initially on stage four where I believed on some moral concerns of the business. However, now I am at stage 6 of universal principles (Nucci, Krettenauer Narvez, (Eds.)., 2014). From all the above-mentioned solutions, I am certainly inclined towards the utilitarian approach of business ethics. I am aware that there are some negative impacts of egoistic behavior and an imperative leader always prefer for help others and work for everyones good. This will benefit the business and the employees. The debate on Ethical Leadership This Business School believes that ethical leadership is impossible in a shareholder focused economy According to the character of Mike, it is seen that he is against the topic given in the motion. His behavior is consistent with the ethics duties behavior given in the Maxim 1 of the Modernist theories. Mike is a retired lecturer from a renowned university and has been consistent with his though of business ethics. He believes a company should always have good people that can lead to good environment. However, his behavior towards his daughter puts him in the stage two of the Kohlbergs moral development model (Kurtines, 2014). This is because he is driven by his own interest and wants his daughter to seek his footsteps. This shows that h is demanding in his nature. His daughter is espousing new ethics in the organization that is different from the ethics used by shareholders. Thus, Mike displays stage two of Kohlbergs model and maxim 1 of Deontological ethics. Jan is also seemed to be against the topic suggested by the motion. According to her behavior, she believes in moral ethics, works for the good of her company, and does charitable work (Hoffman, Frederick, Schwartz, 2014). This puts her in the stage 6 of the moral development model and maxim 2 of human dignity. However, it is also seen that being the CEO of the company she has a dominant nature of doing what is right for the companys ethics. This puts her in utilitarian stage of consequentiality theory. She also displays egoism like Mike as she is using he employees for accomplishing her own needs. Mei-Hua is also against the claim given in the motion. She is a a successful and well renowned manager of one of the best pharmaceutical company of the world. She believes in ethics of the business and abides by the rules and governance of the business. This puts her in the utilitarian aspect of the consequential ethics and maxim 1 3 of deontological ethics as she is doing this for the good of all the employees and company (Paquette, Sommerfeldt, Kent, 2015). Moreover, her good intention behind the large settlement implies that she is stage 3 and 4 of the Kohlbergs model. She states that she is just following the rules of the company and working for everyones good. Deshi Chen was the only one person against the motion. He did not believe in ethical leadership. According to him corporate believe in profit and there is nothing as ethics in business. This act of his displays utilitarian thought. He is in the stage 5 and maxim 3 of the moral development model. However, his disagreement on business ethics and view of other teams shows that he believes in egoism of teleological ethics (Bonnemains, Claire, Tessier, 2016). He is following whatever is best for him and not for the ethics of the business. On the other hand, it shows that Deshi might be considered on stage 2 because he is doing what is most beneficial according to his situation. The poverty that he and his family faced made him feel like this. Coming to myself I too believe in ethical leadership which is evident as I did not question my seniors and head of the restaurant about the new hire. The decision I took to stay on the side of utilitarian ethics puts me on stage 6 of universal principle of Kohlberg model. Thus, from the above discussion it is clear that everyone believes in ethical behavior in business environment except Deshi. The holiday case The case discusses about various types of dilemma coming from all people of the company, which played a role in helping Boris to reach on a decision. The first person to face a dilemma in this case study is Boris, the employee of the advertising agency company. He faced a dilemma between choosing his job and working for the client or going to his girlfriend Swee Lans place to meet her parents. Further, he also faced the dilemma while talking to his manager of choosing between his job and his holiday. He faced last dilemma when his friend questioned his decision and he was confused whether his decision was right or his friends are correct. Another person to face the dilemma is Swee Lan who was in a dilemma of choosing her parents happiness and Boris work. She was confused because if she supported Boris in giving up his holiday then she would have hurt her parents. On the other hand forcing Boris to choose the holiday would affect his career. Boriss manager was the third person to be affected by a dilemma between granting Boris his holiday and asking him to serve the client. His choice of allowing Boris to take a holiday would result in losing an important client of the company. Whereas, asking Boris to cancel his holiday would make one of his employee unhappy. The last person is Marcus, friend and colleague of Boris. He faced two sided problem, one is deciding to help Boris on taking a difficult decision he was facing and the other was blaming Boris of canceling his leave. This is because Boris canceling his leave would result in further cancelation of leaves of other employees in case of urgency in business. However, from the above four dilemma, Boris dilemma is the most important as he is the important character of the play. From the dilemma that Boris faced it is clear that he exhibits there characteristic of egoism. This puts him in the utilitarian theory of modernist ethical model. This is seen as Boris decides to cancel his holiday and stay back at office without even consulting his girlfriend. He is also in the stage two of the Kohlberg model as he cancels his holiday for which he will be rewarded in future. However, he is also in the stage 5 of the Kohlberg model where he realizes that there are people in his office and around which have different opinion and he decides to go against those opinions (Crane Matten, 2016). On the other hand, the dilemma that Boris face with his manager puts him in the Utilitarian stage of modernist theory of ethics where he decides to work for his company and get them better projects. This will benefit large number of people in his office as well. This also displays stage four in the nature of Boris as he realized his responsibility of obeying the rules of his office. However, again with Marcus he was egoist as he gave his own opinion that his decision of staying back was right (Mischel, 2013). This shows that Boris has been in ethical dilemma due to its social consciousness and morality towards his office. He will be in trouble in future because of giving up on his friends and girlfriend due to the needs of his office work. Interpersonal and team working skills The debate that we faced in this module was very interesting and helped us to learn many things about our behavior and thinking towards others. During this debate we were able to realize that we went through phase 2 and phase 5 of the Kohlberg theory of moral development. We gave our best in giving our views in all possible way we could. However, initially we saw ourselves at phase 2 of the Kohlberg model because at first we did not took active participation in the debate and was only waiting for good results (Zizek, Garz, Nowak, 2015). On the other hand there were ewe members who only focused on themselves and did not bother to give any response in the debate. They were facing the Utilitarian theory of egoism and self-development (Hayry, 2013). However, as the debate continued we found that it is interesting to be a part of it and give our view. This helped us to know that our thinking about the debate was wrong as it is not for harming anyone. It only helped the team members to share their views that they possess about the topic. As we moved forward the debate became more complex and conflicting and we moved to phase five. We realized that the situation of conflict and argument is an active part of the debate as every individual is sharing their own views on the topic (Lapsley, Carlo, 2014). There was an opposition team also which various kinds of views. The debate had put everyone in the non-consequential ethics which reflected the rights and justice that the people has (Nye, Plunkett, Ku, 2015). As there is no right or wrong answer for anything, it is just the views that differs about a single topic. The team member who were non active initially were also taking participation in the debate. Thus, the debate benefitted everyone in the team. References Bonnemains, V., Claire, S., Tessier, C. (2016). How Ethical Frameworks Answer to Ethical Dilemmas: Towards a Formal Model. InEDIA@ ECAI(pp. 44-51). Crane, A., Matten, D. (2016).Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press. Giacalone, R. A., Promislo, M. D. (2014).Handbook of unethical work behavior: Implications for individual well-being. Routledge. Hayry, M. (2013).Liberal utilitarianism and applied ethics. Routledge. Hoffman, W. M., Frederick, R. E., Schwartz, M. S. (Eds.). (2014).Business ethics: Readings and cases in corporate morality. John Wiley Sons. Huang, C. C., Yen, S. W., Liu, C. Y., Huang, P. C. (2014). The relationship among corporate social responsibility, service quality, corporate image and purchase intention.International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online),6(3), 68. Knez, I. (2016). Is climate change a moral issue? Effects of egoism and altruism on pro-environmental behavior.Current Urban Studies,4(02), 157. Kurtines, W. M. (2014).Handbook of moral behavior and development: Volume 1: Theory. Psychology Press. Lapsley, D., Carlo, G. (2014). Moral development at the crossroads: new trends and possible futures.Developmental psychology,50(1), 1. Mischel, T. (Ed.). (2013).Cognitive development and epistemology. Academic Press. Montalbo, E. E. (2015). Corporate Social Responsibility Approaches and Implementation in Selected Fast Food Restaurants in Batangas City, Philippines.Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research,3(3). Mulgan, T. (2014).Understanding utilitarianism. Routledge. Nucci, L., Krettenauer, T., Narvez, D. (Eds.). (2014).Handbook of moral and character education. Routledge. Nye, H., Plunkett, D., Ku, J. (2015). Non-Consequentialism Demystified. Paquette, M., Sommerfeldt, E. J., Kent, M. L. (2015). Do the ends justify the means? Dialogue, development communication, and deontological ethics.Public Relations Review,41(1), 30-39. Su, H. Y. (2014). Business ethics and the development of intellectual capital.Journal of Business Ethics,119(1), 87-98. Weiss, J. W. (2014).Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Zizek, B., Garz, D., Nowak, E. (Eds.). (2015).Kohlberg revisited. Springer.