Car Parts Store Swot Analysis

The key parties are George, John, the customers, the owner of the car parts store, and John’s family. George is one of the key parties and what George has at stake is his friendship with John if George chooses to confront John resulting in a conflict if John chooses not to heed George’s advice. George will then have to face the difficult decision if he is unable to persuade John to listen, to be a “rat” and tell the owner/other managers or authorities about what John is doing since it is illegal and dishonest. George values his friendship with John, who he has been friends with for over five years and did help him get the part time job. However, George also values honesty, integrity, and feels responsibility or a duty as John’s friend to tell …show more content…
Customers would also value integrity, responsibility, and honesty, as virtues of stores from which they purchase things from because they would not like to go and buy car parts from a store that has employees doing illegal actions such as changing invoice data and exploiting the system. The owner of the car parts store as one of the key parties has the profits of the car parts store and the reputation of the store at stake if customers or clients find out that there is an employee at the store doing illegal and untruthful things which can harm the reputation of the store. Additionally, the owner of the car parts store is also losing profit because the cash that John kept himself from the refund of the parts, could have been sold to the customers. The owner of the car parts store would value integrity, honesty, and responsibility in his/her employees because he/she would not want the reputation or the profits of the company to go down, and in order for to maintain the store as mentioned, would need employees who have such ideals and business …show more content…
George can argue against what John is doing as unethical because it is illegal and under the ethical framework of slippery slope and overvaluing outcomes. Under the ethical framework of slippery slope, John by lying to George even that he was just dealing with returns from earlier and that it was a regular routine done at night, is unable to recognize his own unethical behavior and may just continue his illegal actions because he sees no harm in it, until he is finally caught and facing criminal charges. Furthermore, under the ethical framework of overvaluing outcomes, George can argue that John is just giving a pass to his unethical behavior because the outcome is beneficial to him in that John is performing the cash returns and able to basically keep the money for himself. George can also use as one of his argumentation levers the publicity rule in having John think about his actions if it was published on the front page of the newspaper. For John’s family, George could argue that they are acting unethically under the ethical frameworks of motivated blindness because John’s family would be more inclined to encourage or defend John’s actions if they are earning extra money or income to spend as a way of support or luxuries. The argumentation levers George can use to convince himself to tell John what he is doing is wrong or further persuade John is by