Witikko 1

Veronica Witikko

Business Ethics

Case Study Analysis Paper

December 9, 2016

Omnicom Marketing

In this case study analysis paper, I shall argue that it would be morally unacceptable for Mark to

penalize Kate for her drop in productivity. As I will explain, her problems with productivity could have

been prevented had Mark been attentive to the office environment. Most importantly though, this case

comes down to the degree of seriousness within each violation of the moral standard, which will be

examined in detail in the content to follow.

Utilitarianism

The proponents of this action would say that using Mark would be better serving his entire team

and company for that matter, if he were to fire Kate. From his point of view, her drop in productivity is

extreme and cannot be ignored. Kate has missed several big deadlines, which gave the rest of her team

the responsibility of finishing her tasks. She was caught using work time to check social media and her

enthusiasm has dropped greatly. Along with this, if Mark is aware of the sexual comments that his team

is making, it could be seen as being easier for him to fire Kate than for him to address the problem. If he

let Kate go, the rest of his team would be able to continue making sexual comments until it made anyone

else uncomfortable. While this may not be moral, it would reap benefits for more than just Kate.

Understanding the big picture is essential to the utilitarian theory in this case. The main

individual that would suffer in this instance is Kate, if you look at it solely from the viewpoint of

someone working inside of the firm. However, if you look at the bigger picture, the image and business
 Witikko 2

of the firm is at risk. Whether or not Mark is aware of the sexual comments, Kate could file a sexual

harassment suit against the company. If he were to fire her without inquiring about what has caused her

drop in productivity, the public could see the action as being sexist, especially if she spoke openly about

the sexual comments and the fact that despite her qualifications, she was treated like an errand girl. This

could influence prospective clients and employees. Less women may apply after catching wind of the

way in which Mark dealt with Kates situation. On a separate note, if Kate were to be fired, Mark would

have to find someone to fill her place. Minimally, this would mean looking through the other applicants

for Kates position and training in a new employee, but it could also mean another round of interviews

and new applicants.

While there are clearly relevant points on both sides of this study, I do believe that there are

more benefits to all if Mark does punish Kate for her drop in productivity. Cases with sexual allegations

of any kind are very tricky and could have strong implications for the company accused. Kate would

have a strong case. She has not been listened to or valued and is given trivial tasks that do not live up to

her qualifications. Meanwhile, she had to endure sexual banter from an almost entirely male team at

work that makes her feel uncomfortable. If Kate files that suit, it be a PR problem for her entire team,

and most likely the entire firm. Marks failure to notice and address the sexual comments, as well as his

lack of effort to make the office environment inclusive for women, would reflect very poorly upon the

firm. It has the possibility to make the firm appear less appealing to women and other minority

populations because Kate was made to feel unvalued and disrespected. Along with this, if Mark were to

fire Kate, he would have to find someone new to replace her. This means new applications, interviews

and training. It would be unnecessary hassle when all that is necessary is a simple conversation. If this

applicant was a woman, its very likely that this predicament would become cyclical. After all, if the
 Witikko 3

team has not been reprimanded for the sexually demeaning comments, their behavior will remain the

same. Nothing changes, if nothing changes.

Rights Theory

Those who would be in favor of this action would say that keeping Kate on the team without

consequence would violate the other team members rights to adequate working conditions. Because she

is not completing her tasks on time, they are having to complete extra work to get them done. One could

also argue that the teams sexual comments could be accepted as their right to freedom of expression

and right to culture. After all, in a workplace comprised of mostly males within a society that has been

said to foster a rape culture, its more that possible many sexual comments would be accepted. Donald

Trump exemplified that idea this year. He was found to have said that because he was famous, he could

grab them by the pussy. American society chose to elect him and dismiss this as locker room talk,

when it was truly bragging about sexual assault.

Many of the relevant facts fall on Kates side when evaluating the case through the lens of the

natural rights theory. Most notably, the sexual comments that were made violate Kates right to security

of person and right to adequate working conditions. As Kate stated, these comments made her very

uncomfortable. As a woman, it would be very difficult to feel secure in a workplace that does not listen

to your ideas, but allows sexual comments about women to be made on a regular basis. An employee

should not have to wear earplugs to feel secure or to avoid lude and demeaning conversations. That not

only affects a persons sense of security, but it also makes for very poor working conditions. Aside from

the sexual comments, Kates right to work had been actively violated by Mark. Kate was hired into an

entry level position with qualifications that surpassed what a typical entry level position would expect.

Moreover, Kate stated that she was not given serious work. Instead she was asked to complete tasks that
 Witikko 4

are more secretarial, like running errands. The team also refused to listen to or employ any of Kates

ideas.

When examining this case with the Natural Rights Theory, the seriousness of each right must be

considered. Both sides have relevant facts that prove that the right to adequate working conditions had

been violated. However, on one side, it is the burden of extra work and on the other side there is a

perceived threat to security and dignity. Sexual harassment is far more serious than extra paperwork.

Furthermore, Kate has additional rights that had been violated, including the right to work and the right

to security of the person. Kate stated that she is given minor tasks, like running errands. It seems as

though this case comes down to whether the decision makers sees more of a problem in someone else

having to get coffee for the team than an employee having to endure sexual harassment daily.

Justice Theory

There are two relevant facts that support Marks actions if he were to give Kate consequences.

First, Kate has missed deadlines. If other workers missed deadlines, they would likely be dealt

consequences as well. Second, Kate has been using her time on the clock to check social media. Both of

these issues do make the decision maker question how just it would be for Mark to keep Kate without

imposing any sanction.

Several of the relevant facts of the case point indicate that justice theory would be violated if

Mark were to fire Kate or give her consequences. In her daily work life, Kate is not treated similarly to

her other coworkers. She stated that her ideas are not even acknowledged in her workplace, while her

male coworkers ideas are valued and employed. Furthermore, Kate is given trivial tasks, like running

errands, while her teammates are given the serious work. This is another case of Kate being treated

dissimilarly to her similars. Finally, Kate is subjected to sexually lude comments in the workplace that
 Witikko 5

leave her feeling uncomfortable. Her male coworkers are not forced to endure sexual harassment.

Because of this, Kate would actually be dissimilar to her male teammates. Yet she is being held to the

same standards as her dissimilars. This point is not meant to insinuate that Kate deserves any special

treatment. It is meant to show the flaws in Marks management of the team. He should be aware of what

is going on within his own team. Kate claims the sexual comments have been frequent and serious

enough that she could file a sexual harassment suit and Mark is completely oblivious to the situation.

This is Marks fault and the fault of his team. An office environment should be safe and respectful to

diversity, be it gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.

When it comes down to the justice theory, this case does not seem to have a very obvious right

or wrong decision. However, like many of the other theories, the seriousness of the sides must be taken

into consideration. While a team member may feel Kate is getting cut a deal she has proved to be

undeserving of, these team members are very possibly the same men that are making comments that

make Kate compromise her work environment standards to hold her position at this firm.

Care Theory

On the surface level, this case suggests that Mark should fire Kate, or minimally give her

consequences. If he were not to do so, he would be violating the relationship between himself and his

other team members. He has watched them pick up Kates unfinished work and make up for her missed

deadlines. Kates actions have violated her relationship with her team. They have picked up her slack

while she used her work time to check social media.

If the decision maker were to examine this case with scrutiny and the care theory, they would see

that most relevant facts are in Kates favor. There are many relevant relationships within a workplace,

but in this case it comes down to only two. The first is the supervisor-supervised relationship. Mark is
 Witikko 6

the supervisor, and he has been watching Kates productivity drop without consulting her. A simple

inquiry would have been a remedy. Hello Kate, I have noticed that you have missed a few deadlines. Is

there anything going on in the workplace or in your personal life that is making work more difficult? It

could be that simple. Instead, Mark has chosen to stay silent and wait for performance reviews. By that

time, the situation may get worse. Mark also does not seem to notice or care that Kate is excluded or that

her ideas are ignored. The second relationship that has been violated is the relationship among

coworkers. Her male coworkers often make sexual comments about women around Kate, leaving her

feeling violated and uncomfortable. A relationship between men and woman cannot be founded on

derogatory sexual comments. Her relationship with her team is thrown off balance because when they

make these comments, they are making it clear that she is not an important part of the team. They build

themselves up by making her feel less. That is a violation of their relevant relationship with Kate.

When all of the relevant facts are examined, it becomes very clear that punishing Kate would

violate care theory. While there are several points on each side of this case, most fall on Kates side.

Marks failure to notice the harmful relationships between Kate and his team is a violation of his

relationship to her and the teams comments are a violation of their relationship with Kate.

Catholic Social Teaching

Those who feel that Kate deserves a punishment would look at his case through Catholic Social

Teaching from the point of view of Mark and his team. The first principal is not violated. The team and

Mark are both able to embrace a very communal work environment. The team members are valued, their

ideas are embraced and they are allowed communicate anyway they please. Mark has the opportunity to

have open communication with his employees. It is unclear if he does communicate well with most of

the team, but he clearly does not embrace this channel of communication with Kate. Next, there are not
 Witikko 7

any relevant facts that indicate Mark and his teams dignity and worth have been negatively impacted.

No one is being made to feel less than one another by Kates actions or therefore lack of. Her actions

only affect others perceptions of her dignity and worth. The first aspect of Catholic Social Teaching that

would be violated if she was not given a consequence would be the concept that all human beings have

rights. As previously mentioned when discussing Rights Theory, Kates actions have negatively

impacted the teams right to adequate working conditions by forcing them to complete work that she had

not finished herself. Also, the right to freedom of expression and culture comes into play in Kates

situation. If Kate complains about the sexual comments and they are penalized, their freedom of

expression is challenged, as well as the office culture in which they have functioned well and become

comfortable. Another aspect of Catholic Social Teaching that is violated is the idea of the common good.

The fact that the team is having to complete extra work because Kate failed to meet deadlines violates

the common good to the team members. They cannot reach human perfection if they have an overload

of work, due to someone elses failure to follow through and finish assignments. The last aspect of

Catholic Social Teaching that is violated is the just treatment of human beings. Those who feel that

Kates actions should have consequences would say that she would be receiving preferable treatment

when compared to the treatment of her coworkers. If her coworkers were to use office time to check

social media and miss deadlines, they would suffer a consequence. This, they would say, is a case of

similar individuals being treated dissimilarly.

The most relevant facts that support my moral judgement in its violation of Catholic Social

Teaching all revolve around the alleged sexual harassment that took place inside the office. This

harassment would violate all aspects of Catholic Social Teaching. First of all, sexual harassment

negatively affects the office environment and Kates ability to embrace the communal nature of her life.
 Witikko 8

The comments her coworkers are making have made her uncomfortable and left her with enough

ammunition for a harassment suit. As if the sexual comments were not enough, Kate is also excluded.

Her team consists mostly of males, and though she has tried many times to be social, she often finds

herself being included. Moreover, whenever she would try to share her ideas, the team shut her down.

All of these reasons combined obstruct Kates human communal nature. The next aspect of Catholic

Social Teaching that is violated is a human beings fundamental dignity and worth. The alleged sexual

harassment is a direct violation of this aspect because it attacks womens dignity and worth. The

comments the coworkers had been making about women are derogatory and negative, leaving Kate

feeling attacked and uncomfortable. Aside from the sexual comments, her dignity and worth as a team

member are not respected. Kate felt that she was very qualified, if not overqualified for her position.

Despite these qualifications, she is essentially being used as the teams secretary. While she is qualified

for more serious work, her dignity and worth are being stripped to a minimum by only giving her

undignified work, like running errands. Furthermore, the team does not listen to or value Kates input.

This also attacks her dignity and worth as an employee and a teammate because her intellect is not

respected or valued. Catholic Social Teaching also functions through the belief that human beings have

certain fundamental rights. Some of these rights are violated through the action of giving Kate

consequences. Most notably, Kates right to adequate working conditions had been actively violated.

One of the ways in which this right was violated was through the sexual comments made by her

teammates. As previously stated, these comments made Kate very uncomfortable and occurred often

enough that she feels she would have been able to file a sexual harassment suit. She has also come to the

conclusion that she works in an environment in which she is not viewed as a valuable member of the

team. Her input is not listened to or used. Another aspect of Catholic Social Teaching is the common
 Witikko 9

good. This too has been violated in this case. Kates quality does not meet standards that allow her to

reach her transcendent end. She has to listen to sexual harassment daily, is unvalued and

underappreciate. It would be extremely difficult to reach human perfection under those conditions. The

final aspect that of Catholic Social Teaching that has been violated is just treatment. Kate is given trivial

tasks and is subjected to sexual harassment. Her ideas are not valued and are not given the consideration

of those of her male coworkers.

As with many other theories, when evaluating this case, the decision maker has to consider the

seriousness of the violations on both sides. The relevant faces show Mark, Kate and the team have been

violated. However, Mark and the teams violations are much more trivial than the violations that Kate

has faces. Sexual harassment in a violation of every aspect of Catholic Social Teaching, especially a

persons fundamental dignity and worth. Imagine working in an environment where small talk consists

mostly of derogatory comments about a group in which you identify. A person simply cannot reach

human perfection under those conditions. Constantly feeling less-than breeds only failure, especially

when a person already feels like they do not have a voice in the given environment.

An important part of this analysis is its connection to concepts relating to interpersonal

communication. Because the most telling factor of this case was the alleged sexual harassment, while it

was intended for this to be discussed after each section, it would have been repetitive to do so. For this

reason, this section can be applied to each theory involved in moral reasoning and to the moral decision

as a whole.

One aspect of interpersonal communication that should be taken into consideration when looking

at this case is Maslows Hierarchy of Needs (qtd. in Wood, 2015). This is so important because it is a

concrete way to compare the levels of fulfillment Kate and the team are at. First of all, it should be noted
 Witikko 10

that everyones physical needs seem to be met. Sexual harassment does not directly affect essential items

like food or water, and neither does doing some extra work. However, if Kate were to be fired, her

physical needs could become much more difficult to meet. Aside from physical needs, Kate is at a very

different place than her team. The team is trying to reach self-actualization and Kates actions very well

may negatively affect them in their efforts. However, because of the office environmentsexual

comments and lack of genuine care and valueKate is struggling to achieve psychological safety,

belonging and self-esteem needs. When this concept is taken into consideration, it becomes very clear

that Kate is the real victim of this situation.

Another important concept to take into consideration when making this decision is the core of

communication: it is impossible to not communicate (Wood 2015). Silence is a form of communication.

In this case, it could easily be assumed that Marks lack of action or dialogue towards Kate demonstrates

lack of care for his employees, or for women, if he does communicate with her male counter parts. The

fact that Mark has not corrected the sexual comments further demonstrates this lack of care. Mark has

had enough time to notice Kates behavior, but not enough time to speak to her about what is happening

or to address the work environment that is leaving Kate feeling unvalued and unsafe.

The final aspect worth mentioning is Julia Woods exploration of conflict management. An

understanding that comes from this content is that Kates habit of checking social media and falling

behind on work is her way of expressing the conflict within her work environment. The second principal

of conflict is that is can be expressed covertly, not only overtly (Wood 2015). Kate does not feel she has

any value or voice within the firm. Therefore, she loses focus, rather than attempting to express herself

in an environment where her voice has previously be depreciated.

Another aspect of conflict management that is crucial to understanding this case is the human

beings response to conflict. There are four responses to conflict: exit, neglect, loyalty and voice. The
 Witikko 11

only one that has been found to be most effective in nearly all cases is the voice response. If this is used

the issues are discussed openly from both sides. Sadly, neither Kate nor Mark used this response. Kate

utilized the exit response. Kate displayed signs of psychological withdrawal from her work life through

using work time to check social media and her failure to meet deadlines. In using this response, she

chose not to address the problem and to psychologically abandon her work. On the other hand Mark

used one of two responses: neglect or loyalty. Marks lack of action when it came to addressing the

sexual comments could be explained through the neglect response, if he denied that the sexual

comments were happening. On the other hand, if he did know the sexual comments were taking place,

and he chose to ignore them because he valued the team members that were making them, he would

have been utilizing the Loyalty response. Due the vague nature of the case, we cannot know the

circumstances for certain. (Wood 2015)

The decision maker in the Omnicom Marketing case has a tough decision to make. While several

relevant facts fall on both sides of the situation, it is truly important that the seriousness of each fact is

taken into account. As previously stated, this case ultimately comes down to whether the decision maker

believes it is of greater harm for someone other than Kate to run an errand than it is for Kate to endure

daily sexual harassment. That is why, as the decision maker, I have come to the conclusion that it would

not be morally correct to penalize Kate for her actions.

 Witikko 12

References

Wood, J. (2015) Interpersonal communication: Everyday encounters (8h ed.) Boston:

Wadsworth.