1

Mini-Case Study

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course

Lecturer

Due Date
 2

This paper discusses the problems faced by PCO in the field of construction and

Engineering. It also presents the possible solutions to the problem and analysis of each of the

solutions to come up with the best decision in preventing its closure.

The Problem Statement

Many constructions firms in Dubai collapsed due to the 2008 financial crisis. PCO, which

is an American Construction and Engineering firm, is adversely affected by the crisis. The

company is faced with excessive engineering, planning, and drafting expenditures. This has led

to massive attrition and caused a reduction in the workforce. The company is not able to keep up

with the number of projects. To survive, the company needs to implement an appropriate strategy

to prevent its closure.

Alternatives

The firm can adopt the following strategies to avoid closure; (i) The company can reduce

costs of engineering, designing, and drafting by Ali's company assuming the costs(ii) PCO can

also reduce the salaries of his employees to reduce his operating costs. The company should

adopt an alternative that will produce the best results.

Analysis

Suppose the company adopts the strategy of reducing costs of engineering, designing, and

drafting by Ali's company assuming the costs. In that case, Steve will be unable to explain the

Iran-end portion of the agreement with his top management. This is because, according to the

industry and the government, working around restrictions is seen as unethical, and Steve's

involvement will place PCO in violation of these laws and regulations. On the other hand, if

Steve does not agree to enter into a contract with Ali, PCO will be definitely closed since the

corporate has no effective plans to prevent the closure.

 3

This ethical dilemma for the company represents an ethical problem for Steve. Ali

informs Steve that they could use an intermediary in Dubai to facilitate the contract, which

means that the PCO will indirectly collaborate with the Iranian firm. However, this option for

him to avoid closure of the company will also subject Steve to risk since he is ethical and doesn't

want to go against the State's laws and regulations.

If Steve considers the Consequentialism approach to this ethical dilemma, he should only

enter into the contract with the Iranian firm if the end results will be favorable to the PCO

(McElwee, 2010). His corporate office will not question him since the judgement will be made

based on the results achieved. Steve will be able to justify this decision by citing that the project

was successful. Steve will only be questioned if the contacts result in more losses for the

company and if they affect the State's economy negatively.

On the other hand, if Steve considers the Deontology approach, he will not enter into the

contract. This approach suggests that judgment is made on the course of action; hence Steve

should not violate any laws (Chatterjee et al., 2009). He will face criticism from his corporate

office and the government. Entering into the contract will be unethical since the State has

imposed the sanction for trade between the United States and Iran.

If the company adopts the strategy of reducing the salaries of its employees to reduce its

operating costs, it might enable the company to survive. These funds could be used to finance

other activities that will prevent the firm's closure. However, if Steve decides to reduce the

salaries of the employees, he will have to face criticism from them. This decision will be viewed

as unethical by the employees since they are not satisfied with their salaries.

If Steve considers the consequentialism approach, he will reduce the salaries if it will

result in the prevention of the closure. If the firm does not close, the corporate will judge Steve
 4

as ethical. This is because the end result is successful and helpful to the firm. However, if the

firm is closed, he will not be able to justify his decision of reducing the salaries of the employees

since the end results will be a loss to the company, and it will be viewed as unethical. He will be

in trouble with his corporate.

On the other hand, he will not reduce the salaries if he considers the deontology approach

because he cares for employees, ethics, and moral principle. If he does this, he will be viewed as

unethical to the employees. Steve believes that it will be unfair to reduce the salaries of the

employees. The underpaid employees will not work effectively (Wang & Zhong, 2021). Thus, he

will stay away from the decision to reduce the salaries.

The Appropriate Decision

Steve should adopt the strategy of entering into the contract with Ali. This strategy seems

beneficial since Ali’s company can carry out the engineering, designing, and drafting work at a

cost equal to a fifth of the cost incurred by the PCO. This will save PCO a considerable amount

that can be used to finance the projects that are highly affected, thus preventing the firm from

closing. Although it is against the State's rules and regulations, involving an intermediary might

solve the problem.

Action Plan

The firm can therefore implement the strategy of reducing engineering, designing, and

drafting costs by letting Ali assume the costs. All the costs will be borne to Ali. Ali has to assure

Steve that the contract will result in better results that will ensure that his corporate office or the

government will not question him. Steve, Ali and the corporate office of Steve should sign the

contract.
 5

References

Chatterjee, S., Sarker, S., & Fuller, M. A. (2009). A deontological approach to designing ethical

collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(3), 6.

McElwee, B. (2010). The rights and wrongs of consequentialism. Philosophical Studies, 151(3),

393-412.

Wang, L., Song, F., & Zhong, C. B. (2021). High Compensation and Unethical

Reciprocity. Journal of Management, 01492063211040557.