"Policy and control in strategic planning

Given that the management was in favor of the idea, the employee was worried about what would happen if he was discovered.

The bureaucratic procedures that make up organizational culture allow for less interaction between top management and employees. The line of command is strictly adhered to, and any attempts to change the sequence in which decisions are made are sternly rejected. Additionally, because upper level management has more power to decide what is acknowledged and what is not, there is less involvement of workers in decision-making. The same is evident in the way Mary cuts off Joe's worries and demands that they be altered. There is also a non-collaborative and fearful environment where workers are driven by threats. For instance, the case reports Joe as being very worried about Mary’s statements that threatens to deny him the position of a District Manager-Computer Systems, which is a position he had worked hard so hard to achieve. In particular, Mary threatens that if Joe does not do things as told she will have his suitability and competence for the position reviewed.

Most probably, Mary has a hidden interest in the success of the project against the overall objective of the company. She is more driven by “proving” her grounds as a decision-maker than by the long-term welfare of the company. She does not want to be seen as a failure, especially since she participated in the decision to use the system, or there is a possibility that she has a financial interest in the acquisition of the system.

Seemingly, Mary must have had undesirable past moments when employees reported poor performance to the CEO behind her back. She seems to disapprove of any efforts made by employees that might place them at a better limelight that she is in. Also, the manager appears bent on pleasing the CEO in a rather overly way to win his approval and possible support for future employee incentives such as promotions. She appears to be fed up with her current situation and the sooner she moves higher along the career ladder the better for her.

John’s leadership appears to be autocratic.

John does not have direct contact with ground activities and only receives updates through his managers. Also, he seems to preside over a formal hierarchical organizational structure with strict management rules and guidelines. The fact that workers have to do whistleblowing to leak secrets to the top management means that the contact between the CEO and the people implementing projects on the ground is almost non-existent. In particular, the relations in the organization are impersonal.

Joe has various options as discussed in the following section.

The first option Joe has is to comply with Mary’s decision to present a “positive” letter to the CEO along with supporting documents, which in my view will be a loss to the organization and to Joe. The other thing is to request to meet the CEO in person and to report that the interest of the company is at stake and that his boss is breaking company rules and guidelines by hiding crucial evidence for decision-making. Thirdly, if the boss is inaccessible or unreceptive, Joe can request the intervention of appropriate employer and employee regulatory bodies, as the matter is of public concern since the society has invested in the welfare of the company. Nonetheless, it would be appropriate that Joe is assured of adequate protection before proceeding with the last two steps.

Writing a positive letter as advised by the Division Manager might help Joe avoid repercussions in the short term. Nonetheless, in the long-term, the failure or total collapse of the information system might cost Joe his job. It might also mean a big set back to the welfare of the organization in which Joe has worked so hard to protect his career growth interests. He will lose any favorable opinion from his colleagues and line managers regarding his competence and ability to oversee the district’s information system. Also, because of his collaboration, the public consisting of investors, workers, customers, administration, and suppliers might lose a lot.

If I were Joe, I would do what is in the best interest of the company and the public. Revealing the hidden secrets is the most ethical thing to do. I will inform the CEO of the situation as it is.

I were Mary, I will shun my personal interests and do what the company employed me to do and that is protecting the interests of other stakeholders and ensuring profitability. Adopting an ethical approach to my business will eventually win me the things I desire without breaking any law. Accepting my prior mistakes and doing whatever is essential to ensure future success is the best thing to do.

In my capacity as the division manager, I stand to lose my influence and role if the system under implementation fails to give results. In particular, I risk losing the trust of my boss and that of my colleagues and juniors.