10.5840/jbee20118112

Journal of Business Ethics Education 1 (1):167-180 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Spaulding vs. Zimmerman is a lawsuit that raised the issue of the extent of how much information a negotiator can withhold from the other side and still remain within the bounds of ethical propriety. The author took the case and fashioned it into an exercise an organization can use as a vehicle for members to analyze their personal ethical choices under difficult, real world circumstances. The exercise is powerful and may be administered at any level of management training. It is disguised as a negotiation, so the ethical issues are obscured by the parties’ negotiation goals and tactics. The debriefing will lead to productive discussions about personal ethics/values decisions. The exercise can be as simple or complex as the moderator chooses. The general fact sheet, the employee’s facts, and the employer’s facts are attached in the Appendix. The user is encouraged to copy them for their specific needs

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-01

Downloads
14 (#968,362)

6 months
11 (#225,837)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references