Ethics Review Team B reviewed the Ethics Game Simulation and the Ethic Responsibility Project completed individually by members of team B during week three of ETH/316. Each team member has provided a review of there findings.
Stephen
Stephen completed the ethics game simulation’s two scenarios. The first scenario had to do with sexual harassment and the second scenario had to do with falsified data for a potential product. Both scenarios seemed simple on the surface, but once further research was conducted the answers to each scenario became a little more difficult. The scenarios took Stephen through a process to achieve the desired result and explained why things needed to be don’t in a certain way. For example, a big decision is to analyze all the information a then make a decision what is the first thing to do. For the first scenario, the first thing to do figure out what the problem is which meant talking to the female worker and explaining that all attempts would be made to keep her information confidential, however dependent on the allegations that it may not be completely possible. The next step was to find out who the primary stakeholders were. This was a difficult task for the author that prompted a review of outline materials referencing ethical stakeholders. The ethical lens was used to determine what the author should do initially was the Rights and Responsibilities Lens (Ethics game, 2007). The rights and responsibilities lens allowed the author to look at what ‘duties’ were required in this scenario (Ethics game, 2007). The second scenario was a little more straightforward than the first scenario. The process was similar to the process in scenario one. The first thing to do is establish exactly what the problem is, then what is the most important, or first thing that must be done to remedy the problem. After that is done, then next thing to