PSYC 644 Case Analysis: Scenarios for Analysis Assignment Instructions
Overview
For this assignment you will be choosing a case analysis scenario to analyze. This Case Analysis assignment will help you identify elements and strategies involved in a moral decision-making process, analyze ethical decision-making processes, and evaluate decision-making from a Christian perspective. Each of these learning outcomes are valuable tools that can be utilized within an organizational setting, academic setting, or in everyday personal life situations.
Instructions
Select 1 of the Scenarios for Analysis from Case Study 3.2 on pages 8991 of the Johnson (2019) text. Using 1 of the decision-making formats that are presented in the text and/or other reading and study materials, analyze your scenario of choice. Make sure to address the following questions:
1. Did following a system help you come to a better conclusion? Why or why not?
2. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the format you selected?
3. Would the format you selected be a useful tool for solving the ethical problems you face at school and work?
4. What role might a Christian worldview play in the decision-making process for the scenario of your choice?
Present your analysis and evaluation in an 8001,200-word paper prepared following current APA guidelines for professional papers. Be sure to support your conclusions with at least 1 reference to the textbook, at least 1 reference to Scripture, and at least 1 scholarly journal article. Include proper current APA citations and a reference list.
Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.
? ?Case Study 3.2: Scenarios for Analysis
Scenario 1: Is It Better to Ask Permission or to Ask Forgiveness? Anselmo Escobar is the owner of Stately Homes, a small residential contracting firm. Stately Vistas is the companys biggest project yet. Escobar is eager to begin building this new subdivision after a series of costly delays caused by a backlog in the city zoning office. He plans to remove nearly all the mature trees in the area so that he can build more homes and recoup his losses. However, the contractor knows this move will be unpopular with current residents, who believe that the trees enhance the neighborhood and improve property values. Escobar is under no legal obligation to consult with the neighborhood association about his plans. Further, he fears that notifying neighbors might lead to additional delays. A successful protest could force Anselmo to retain some of the trees scheduled for removal. Yet the builder feels uneasy about moving ahead without talking to neighborhood representatives. Taking unilateral action could generate negative publicity and increase opposition to future Stately Homes developments. More important, Escobar wonders about his responsibility to current residents. He knows that he would be upset if another contractor removed trees in his neighborhood without notifying anyone. As he ponders what to do, Anselmo is reminded of the old saying, It is easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. He is torn between consulting with the neighbors before removing the trees (asking for permission) and removing the trees and then dealing with the fallout (asking for forgiveness). What should Escobar do?
?Scenario 2: When the Good News Is Bad News Employees and administrators at Kentucky College were excited to hear that the incoming freshman class was the largest in ?the small private schools history. Years of slumping enrolment had left the college, which depends heavily upon tuition dollars, strapped for cash. Now the schools leadership could add new staff, increase faculty salaries, and improve facilities. Unfortunately, what was good news for the Kentucky College as a whole was bad news for some freshmen. There werent enough rooms available to house everyone. New students were placed in study rooms and in double rooms that were converted to triples by adding an extra bunk bed. All students paid the same price for room and board regardless of their housing arrangements. A few freshmen complained, arguing that they should pay less because their living arrangements werent equal to those of other students. The housing director refused their request. Less revenue would mean fewer repairs to dorms and apartments. In addition, he believed that conceding to such demands could set a bad precedent. Some dorms are older and more run-down than others. Residents living in these facilities might also claim that they should pay less. Was Kentucky College wrong to admit more students than it could house comfortably? Was the housing director justified in refusing to reduce fees for those students forced to live in substandard conditions?
Johnson, Craig E.. Organizational Ethics (p. 78). SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.
