For any business to realize the economic gain, it has to make morally upright decisions. Businesses that only aim at earning economic gain at the expense of morality often find themselves failing. First of all, it is important to note that, for any business decision to be considered to be both morally upright and of economic gain, it has to take into consideration a couple of factors. The first important factor is the identification of the issue or the problem at hand. In business, this is 1p which stands for the problem. The business officials have to sit down and weigh the relevance of the issue at hand. This includes assessing how ethical the issue at hand is. Secondly, the business has to look at the options that are available in solving the issue at hand. The business officials need to look at the availability of resources within the business to cater to the issue at hand. They have to assess whether making a certain decision will or will not cause financial constraints to the business since the main aim of the business is to realize a profit in the long run. This is termed as the possibility. The third important factor to bear in mind is the assessment of how the decision made is going to affect both the people who directly take part in making the decision and the people who will be indirectly affected by the business decision. This includes even other businesses that interact with this particular business. This is termed the people The fourth important factor to consider is to assess whether the decision made is per the governing principles of the business. If the decision is going to ruin the integrity and the reputation of the business the decision has to be done with. This is termed the principle. The final factor is to weigh the available options and identify the one that is the most appropriate at that given time. In this way, the business will easily be able to defend the decision that it took. The business will be able to deal with any pressures that may result after its implementation for example the public opinion. This is referred to as the priority according to the business triangle that businessmen term as the 5p’s.
Bearing in mind the five important factors that must be considered before making a sound business decision, it is reasonable to select a problematic choice situation and how a business should employ the five important factors to come up with the best decision. The problematic choice situation, in this case, is the New Castle United Team, a soccer team in England, which is deciding whether to sack its coach or not(Narayan 3). First of all, it is important to note that coach Chris Hughton has saved the team from relegation in the 2008-2009 season. He has been able to raise the status of the soccer team to the 12th best in the English Premier League.
The stakeholders of the team are thinking of sacking him in that they think that the team needs a more experienced coach for them to perform even better. They think that if the soccer team gets to have a coach who has more experience he will be able to steer the team forward to almost the top of the League. Recently, the team has started to show a lot of potentials in that they have been able to win 42 of the 46 games that they have played this season. The reason why the stakeholders of the team are thinking of sacking Chis is that the team has lost the last 3 games. However, the team lost in the games because most of the players had suspensions and injuries. However, the condition is expected to stabilize in less than 3weeks because nearly all the players will be back on the playing field. The loss is just short-term. They are no long-term impacts that are expected in that it is hard to pick players when you don’t have your first team to choose from. You cannot be able to balance the potential of the players in that weaker players can do better on the pitch if there are good players in the pitch to save the situation and offer a lot of guidance and moral support. Before making any decisions, the stakeholders have to weigh which of their options in the making of the decision is more ethical. They should not just be attracted to the good performance of the team in the future which means that they would generate more money.
First of all, the stakeholders should realize that sacking this coach who has devoted a lot of effort to the team is not fair. He was able to save the team from the verge of collapse and is now steering it towards the top. Sacking him would mean that the team does not acknowledge and appreciate his tireless efforts. All the work that he has done to get the team where it is goes to the drain unappreciated. By sacking the coach the team will also affect the family of the coach which is dependent on his income. It would not be ethical for him to lose his ob yet he has worked very hard to make sure that the team that he took over in 2008 has shifted from the scraps it used to be to something more reasonable and attractive.
Secondly, the sacking of the coach would not be ethical in that it would affect the players negatively. The players in the team have been used to his coaching tactics. Some of the players have only experienced his service and are not sure that they are going to deliver in case he leaves in that they have to adopt a new playing tactically. Different coaches have different expectations of the players and value different methods of play. Coach Chris Hughton for example stressed on short passes. The incoming coach might be a man who greatly values long passes. Players who have already specialized in perfecting their skills to make short passes will have a lot of difficulties trying to do away with the styles of play that they have worked so hard for to conform to the expectations of the new coach who might come into the team. Players will respond differently to this change in the method of play. They are those who are going to adopt the method fast and retain their position in the first team but some will experience a lot of difficulties adopting this method of play and will find themselves losing their positions in the first team. This is going to be very demoralizing to the players. A decision that is going to demoralize the spirit of some players is not reasonable. In addition, the whole team had been used to the encouragement that the coach gives them and they are now used to him. There is a great possibility that the players might develop a negative attitude to the incoming coach which would mean that they would not be willing to cooperate. This might lead to poor performance by the team or some of the players might seek ways and means of leaving the club and registering into other clubs.
This leads us to the third “p” in the 5p’s triangle. It stands for people. In case, the players decide to have a negative attitude towards the new coach or think of leaving the club, it is going to affect the fans. Soccer fans and other fans pay their homage to the team’s game because they support specific players and they love to see them play. In the world of soccer, there are those players that are talented in dribbling. In the New castle team currently, if a player likes Fabrizio Coloccini, who is among the best defenders that the team has currently left the team, there is going to be a huge vacuum that is going to be created. This will cause a lot of fans to stop supporting the team in they know that the team has become weaker by losing such a player. It is hence worthwhile for the stakeholders to make sure that they do not make a decision that will disappoint the Newcastle fans. It would be unethical to disappoint them in that the purpose of having all these soccer clubs is to create a recreation activity for millions of fans. If the fans are disappointed they will not attend Newcastle’s games and hence the team will not be generating the same income that is used to generate in the past.
The other important thing that the stakeholders should realize is when a new coach comes into the team he is going to find a staff that is already in existence. He might not be comfortable with some of the staff members that he finds. This means that some people in his staff who might be inflexible to abide by the new expectations of the new coach might lose their jobs. This will not be ethical. It would hence be reasonable to maintain the current coach and not affect the jobs of other people. All these staff members might have dependents back home. If any of them loses a job, it will indirectly affect those who rely on their salaries for their survival. Their dependants might be their wives and their kids back home.
The other important thing that the stakeholders should bear in mind when making this decision is that if they decide to sack coach Chris Hughton from the team. It will be hard for them to defend their decision especially from the Newcastle fans and the general public in that everybody has seen what he has been able to do for the team over the years. Many people will consider the decision to be very unethical. The idea of sacking him might be dismissed as being something malicious against the career of coach Chris Hughton. This might ruin the reputation of the Newcastle team.
In addition, one of the principal objectives of the Newcastle team is to make sure that the team provides the best for the fans. Disappointing the fans is against this objective. The decision is hence not ethical in that it is just going to cost the integrity of the stakeholders of the Newcastle United Club. In conclusion, it is clear from the analysis of the problematic situation at hand that the most ethical decision that the Newcastle stakeholders can make is to retain coach Chris Hughton for his good work and let him work his way to the top.
Narayan, Manoj. “Newcastle sack Hughton; Ashley berated.” International Business Times [London] 2010: 5-7. IBTIMES. Web.