Read the documents added.
Post an analysis of what Peter should do, using the five step process: what are Peter's options; what are relevant ethical and practical factors; what does each factor suggest about each option; what reasons are there for thinking some of those factors are more central and relevant; on that basis, what should Peter do; what, if anything, should Peter monitor.
Reply to the following post. Your reply should mention an option, ethical factor, or weighing reason not mentioned in the original post:
'Peter's presented with the issue of a loyal buyer getting an under-the-table discount on their order. According to the scenario, Peter has two options: giving Peabody the discount, or not giving them the discount.
1. Moral Decisions: Peter would have to lie to the front office to grant the credit to Peabody. He could tell the truth but that will likely lead to losing the Peabody account.
2. Moral Considerations: Peter's own personal ethics want him to tell the truth. However, the company has been running business with Peabody this way for a while. Peter will not get in trouble for lying to the front office.
3. Analysis: By lying and giving Peabody the discount, Peter will improve his reputation with his boss and with the buyer. If he refuses, the company may lose Peabody as a buyer, and Peter will be blamed for it. He may even be fired.
4. To keep his job, Peter will have to go against his moral guidelines.
5. Peter should give Peabody the discount. The risks of doing otherwise are great. He could lose his job or even damage the company's reputation if he does otherwise.
Though he is lying, keeping a good customer is good for the business and his employment. He should be wary that this one case of dishonest discounting does not lead to more instances of lying or unlawful business.'
Attachment:- Peter Greens First Day.rar