Mentor’s Comment:
In this case the major concern is the suspicion that too without having any concrete evidence for any fraudulent activities. We need to analyze the merit of the case and take action which is most relevant.
Jeopardizing the organizational ethics and code of conduct will not be good in this case if favour have been asked by Sunil for approving the paper. If proven the certain action must be taken, or if not proven the Bose must feel sorry for taking doubt and donate certain amount to the Old age home.
Before answering, please read the case carefully and think with wider perspective. Ethical stand of all the stakeholders are necessary in this case.
Model Answer:
- The above case is of mere suspicion that too without having any concrete evidence of any fraudulent activities. Here the mere suspicion is that the money deposited is earned by illegal means. The suspicion becomes strong with the fact that the old age home is being owned and run by Sunil’s wife and also the money is being deposited by other person.
- Here the certain amount of pension is being donated to old age home based on Sympathy or might be as a fees of staying in old age home. The relative(s) of the person(s) depositing money might be staying in old age home and if not so, they might be donating certain sum to old age home. There may also be possibility that Sunil might be doing fraud and would have been asking favour from customers for depositing money in return of their paper approval.
- This is a clear case of suspicion. Factoring the various evidences Manoj has following options available with him:
- Asking Sunil Directly: Manoj should ask directly Sunil to clear the doubt related to money deposited and being diverted. Upon Sunil’s detailed reply, if the matter turns to be of fraud, Manoj should warn Sunil of such fraudulent activities and ask him to stop such nuances immediately. This will instill some deterrence in Sunil if he would be wrong.
- Asking favour in return of approving paper turns to be of asking donation which is morally and ethically wrong as per organizational perspective. It implies that, if certain donation is made, the work can be approved jeopardizing the organizational ethics and code of conduct.
- On the other hand, if Sunil is genuine, he should furnish all the relevant proof in-front to Manoj and prove his genuineness. Sunil can ask his boss Manoj also for some donation for the welfare of old people and old age home.
- If Sunil proved to be wrong earlier and warned and continues to do the same, certain bold steps must be taken by Manoj as per the rules and guidance of organisation. He should be suspended from the work and be given a notice upon which he needs to reply on written.
- If further complication occurs, the matter should be referred to the personnel department for appropriate inquiry and action. This will do justice to the organisation as well as professional ethics.
- The case also questions the ethical strand of Ankit who divulged confidentially data unofficially following a thin strand of suspicion. A Bank divulging customer details is a grave folly, it is a breach of trust of customer on part of bank authorities. Certain action also require on Ankit’s act which should also be taken into consideration by the Bank. Such action puts the Bank’s reputation in jeopardy.
