Question 1 Dithaba Construction faces a difficult decision: should it go for the option to accept the government’s stadium tender, or should it go for the option to decline the tender? One decision-making procedure that can help businesses in making ethically sound decisions involves a set of four criteria against which the decision can be measured. Accordingly, the board can ask itself the following four questions:Although it would be legal to accept the stadium contract, describe at least two reasons why acceptance could result in eventual non-compliance with laws and regulations.Will accepting the stadium contract meet company standards? Provide at least two reasons for your answer.Will it be fair to all stakeholders to accept the stadium contract? State at least two stakeholders and how they might be unfairly treated by Dithaba if the company accepts the stadium contract.Can the acceptance of the stadium contract be disclosed to parties internal and external to the company? Discuss why you think the CEO/board does not want to disclose the resource limitations facing the company. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO evaluate the moral soundness of the option to accept the government’s stadium tender by applying the information in the scenario to each of the four questions above. Answer each question separately (1.1. to 1.4). Note the restriction above as to the overall word count for Issue 3’s questions, which guides you as to the length of your answers.Question 2Answer the following two questions in the context of Dithaba Construction’s moral dilemma as to whether to accept or reject the tender for the construction of the stadium:In relation to stakeholders that could be affected by the decision, how can the board use ‘moral imagination’ to guide its decision to accept or reject the stadium tender?In what way would ‘stakeholder engagement’ be beneficial in deciding whether to accept or reject the stadium tender? Your answer should include at least two stakeholders that should be engaged and for what purpose each of them should be engaged (i.e. what should the company ask of them?).Questions 1 and 2 have been formulated from the content of chapter 13 of Business Ethics, Rossouw & Van Vuuren, Oxford University Press South Africa, 6th edition.

Question

Question 1 Dithaba Construction faces a difficult decision: should it go for the option to accept the government’s stadium tender, or should it go for the option to decline the tender? One decision-making procedure that can help businesses in making ethically sound decisions involves a set of four criteria against which the decision can be measured. Accordingly, the board can ask itself the following four questions:Although it would be legal to accept the stadium contract, describe at least two reasons why acceptance could result in eventual non-compliance with laws and regulations.Will accepting the stadium contract meet company standards? Provide at least two reasons for your answer.Will it be fair to all stakeholders to accept the stadium contract? State at least two stakeholders and how they might be unfairly treated by Dithaba if the company accepts the stadium contract.Can the acceptance of the stadium contract be disclosed to parties internal and external to the company? Discuss why you think the CEO/board does not want to disclose the resource limitations facing the company. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO evaluate the moral soundness of the option to accept the government’s stadium tender by applying the information in the scenario to each of the four questions above. Answer each question separately (1.1. to 1.4). Note the restriction above as to the overall word count for Issue 3’s questions, which guides you as to the length of your answers.Question 2Answer the following two questions in the context of Dithaba Construction’s moral dilemma as to whether to accept or reject the tender for the construction of the stadium:In relation to stakeholders that could be affected by the decision, how can the board use ‘moral imagination’ to guide its decision to accept or reject the stadium tender?In what way would ‘stakeholder engagement’ be beneficial in deciding whether to accept or reject the stadium tender? Your answer should include at least two stakeholders that should be engaged and for what purpose each of them should be engaged (i.e. what should the company ask of them?).Questions 1 and 2 have been formulated from the content of chapter 13 of Business Ethics, Rossouw & Van Vuuren, Oxford University Press South Africa, 6th edition.

Answer 1

Question 1.1: Although it would be legal to accept the stadium contract, acceptance could result in eventual non-compliance with laws and regulations for Dithaba Construction for the following reasons:

1.1.1: Quality Control: Accepting the stadium contract may put pressure on the company to cut corners in terms of quality control in order to meet deadlines and stay within budget. This could result in substandard construction that violates building codes and regulations.

1.1.2: Labor Practices: In order to meet tight deadlines and costs, Dithaba Construction may engage in unethical labor practices such as exploitation of workers or hiring undocumented workers. This could result in legal issues and non-compliance with labor laws.

Question 1.2: Will accepting the stadium contract meet company standards?

1.2.1: Strategic Fit: Accepting the stadium contract may not align with the company's long-term strategic goals and vision. The project may divert resources and attention away from more profitable projects that are in line with the company's standards and values.

1.2.2: Reputation: Accepting the stadium contract could tarnish the company's reputation if the project is not completed successfully or if there are any controversies surrounding the construction process. This could negatively impact future business opportunities and stakeholder relationships.

Question 1.3: Will it be fair to all stakeholders to accept the stadium contract?

1.3.1: Employees: If Dithaba Construction accepts the stadium contract and then struggles to deliver quality work within budget, employees may bear the brunt of the consequences through job insecurity, layoffs, or increased workload. This would be unfair to the employees.

1.3.2: Local Community: Accepting the stadium contract may disrupt the local community where the construction takes place, causing inconvenience, noise pollution, and environmental impact. If these concerns are not addressed properly, the community stakeholders would be unfairly treated.

Question 1.4: Can the acceptance of the stadium contract be disclosed to parties internal and external to the company?

1.4.1: Lack of Resources: The CEO/board may not want to disclose the resource limitations facing the company because it could damage their reputation and credibility. If stakeholders, both internal and external, become aware of the company's limitations, it could lead to a loss of trust and potential loss of business opportunities.

Question 2:

In relation to stakeholders that could be affected by the decision, the board can use 'moral imagination' to guide its decision to accept or reject the stadium tender by putting themselves in the shoes of the stakeholders and considering how the decision would impact them. For example, they can imagine how accepting the tender might affect the employees in terms of job security and work conditions, or how it might affect the local community in terms of environmental impact and quality of life.

Stakeholder engagement would be beneficial in deciding whether to accept or reject the stadium tender by involving key stakeholders in the decision-making process and seeking their input and feedback. For example, the company should engage with employees to understand their concerns and needs related to the project, and with local community members to address any potential negative impact on the community. This engagement can help the company make a more informed and ethical decision that takes into account the interests of all stakeholders involved.