Read the case below and answer the questions that follow.

Deliverable:

Be sure to create a cover page that includes: OB 354, Title (for example, Ethical Case), date, and your name.

Please, use 1-inch margins all around and 12-point Times New Roman font. Writing must be in double-spaced format.

Make sure to number your pages, starting with page #1 from the second page (i.e. do not number the cover page).

In your write-up, indicate which exact question is being answered.

Make sure to CITE and REFERENCE your sources appropriately, using APA style!

Case

John is the chief seismologist at one of the leading research facilities in North America. He holds a Ph.D. from the most prestigious university in the country specializing in this field. For a number of years, John has been working on perfecting a method for predicting major earthquakes on the West Coast. John reports to the director of the research center.

The organization is dependent on government agency funds in the form of research grants along with funding from corporate interests. Recently, John has developed a sophisticated technique that he believes is able to forecast, within 80%, the likelihood of the occurrence of an earthquake during a 48-hour period.

The results of a rigorous study that John has just completed, indicate that a 7.3-magnitude quake will hit one of four fault lines in Southern California within the next 2 days. Three of the faults are in less populated areas where major damage will be relatively low. However, the fourth fault is the San Andreas, which, if affected, would result in significant damage to structures and a considerable amount of casualties.

Case Analysis Questions

What are the facts in the case?

What is the issue/dilemma?

What are the John's options?

Evaluate the potential action alternatives below and identify the ethical decision-making approaches that correspond with each action alternative:

* utilitarianism

* self-interest

* categorical imperative

* legalism

* light of day

Justify your response (why do you think alternative "X" is related to "Y" ethical approach).

Potential action alternatives:

Alternative (a): John must be very careful about the dissemination of his research findings. There is a 20% probability that the quake will not occur, and even if the quake does occur, sharing information could be harmful. John will likely be held responsible for the chaos and panic that may result. His career is at stake; he cannot afford to be wrong. of experts like him to confirm his decision; should avoid actions that are not supported by his peers.

Alternative (b): John should refer to the procedures and policies manual published by the research institution. If the organization has a policy regarding the responsibility for the disclosure of information, John should follow these procedures.

Alternative (c): John needs to calculate the expected costs associated with the quake. That is, he must compare the value of sharing the information openly to that of maintaining silence. Given the probability of the occurrence of the quake, John should assign estimated values for injuries sustained, resources needed for cleanup, buildings/structures destroyed, and loss of life. He should then compare these calculations to estimated value, related to releasing information. The amount should include an assessment of the reduction of injuries and deaths, but should be offset by the costs of preparation and the pandemonium that is likely to result if prior information is known (assume John has a computer program that contains the financial estimates; he needs only to enter probability). If releasing information to the public has a higher expected value than remaining silent, then he must divulge his data.

Alternative (d): Without discussing his findings, hypothetically Josh should ask colleagues in his field what they would do in a similar situation. Should seek the advice

Alternative (e): John must share the information with the media. After informing the research director, it is his responsibility to make sure the news of this potential disaster is released to the public. Notifying the director and other government officials is not sufficient; important information may be withheld. John must be sure the truth is known.