I accidentally found out that my team partner Andy was planning to quit the internship just several days before an important presentation. Whether to tell mentor Pam about it became an ethical dilemma. To tell means that I betray my peeking at other’s phone without permission. Not to tell means the possibility to jeopardize the interests of team members. By following the rational decision-making model and thoroughly considering utilitarianism, social justice and other ethical frameworks, the optimized solution has been worked out as talking to Andy first and persuading Andy into talking to Pam. To make Andy believe that he needs to have a conversation with Pam, emotional appeal and rational analysis are applied to convince Andy that it is the best solution for his own sake and can create win-win situation.
First of all is to appeal to Andy’s emotion, for which timing and context are critical. It is unwise to talk about the whole issue out of blue, because it possibly arouses Andy’s anger when he suddenly knows that his privacy was violated. The right time for the conversation is when Andy is absent-minded or seems under stress during the preparation work. When the proper time comes, the first step is to express care by asking Andy what he worries about. The ideal result is to let Andy himself speak out his quitting plan. If Andy intends to keep his decision secret, I will apologize first and admit that I saw the message from his mother. Then I would promise Andy that I have no intention to rat on him and show understanding about his situation. The sincere apology and the offer of help is likely to win over Andy’s trust, which will facilitate the persuasion.
The rational analysis can be divided into two parts: to examine the pros and cons as well as to refute an alternative solution. The suggestion about Andy talking Pam has the following merits. It will minimize the loss of the company, which is in accordance with the doctrine of utilitarianism “greatest good for the greatest number” as Jeremy Bentham states. To tell before it is too late can ensure that Pam has enough time to reassign Andy’s work load. Besides, it reflects well on Andy and helps Andy decently leave the company. If Andy has made up him mind about the quitting, it is just a matter of time for Pam to get to know about it. To tell is better than to be found out. Andy has right to end his internship, but to leave without notice in time is improper.
There are few shortcomings in the suggestion that Andy talks to Pam as soon as possible. One harm may be that Andy has little time to think the quitting thoroughly. According to his mother’s message, Andy still hesitates on whether to quit or not. The internship is a valuable opportunity, which makes his quitting a difficult decision. And apparently Andy is unwilling to rush into decision. However, one thing clear Andy should know is that his hesitation and delay can do more harm than good. If finally he jeopardized the interests of the team and company, his reputation would be affected. Besides, thinking for a long times is unlikely to help him make right decision, but thinking in right way can help him. The rational thinking method will be recommended to him to eliminate the risk that he may regret his rushed decision. The above examination shows that Andy has little cause for concern referring to the conversation with Pam.
Next comes the refutation of an alternative solution. This step is to prove to Andy that his rejection of conversation with Pam will make the situation worse. If Andy denies the possibility to talk to Pam, it will leave me no choice but to report the whole situation to Pam.
Under such circumstances, it is the only way to avoid jeopardizing the presentation. However, Andy should know that the Plan B will put himself at a disadvantage. The alternative solution robbed Andy of the opportunity to obtain Pam’s understanding on his quitting and leave the company without reputation tainted. Though in this way the interests of the majority are preserved, it is far from creating a win-win situation. For Andy’s part, his behavior will be disapproved. For my part, I may leave a bad impression on Pam and team members as a whistle-blower. For Pam’s part, this is definitely not the solution he would expect. The chance for me and Andy to get a full-time position in this company will be small.
The emotional appeal and rational analysis are the main strategies to persuade Andy into talking with Pam. To win over his trust is very important, as my peeking at his phone can harm our relationship. After letting him believe that I am ready to help him, I will put forward my suggestion and rationalizations. The most powerful and persuasive argument is that I have considered all possible solutions for him and the analysis shows that my suggestion is the optimized solution.
