Dinah will now question Pat’s professional ethics and integrity from that point forward. Trust and communication will be in jeopardy at this point and Pat will need to take steps in order to gain that back from Dinah. In my opinion, Pat should have pressed forward with the information she was given to Mr. Leed. Hopefully, Mr. Leed would have made an ethical choice and informed Partco of the issue. Mr. Leed then may be able to negotiate a more favorable discount as opposed to what they were forced to give Partco.
Even though it was a bad situation, not being straight forward with Partco initially probably ended up costing MagRec more in the long run. 2. Do you think Dinah was right? Why or why not? If you were she, and you had to do it all over again, would you do anything differently? If so, what and why? I do think Dinah was right. Dinah brought Pat the file knowing that there was an ethical and legal violation with what MagRec was doing.
One would assume that Dinah is acting properly by showing her supervisor the file and reporting this through her chain of command. If I were Dinah, the only thing differently I would have done was take the file to Mr. Leed once I discovered that it was not reported to him. This way MagRec Management still has the opportunity to address it and try to resolve what had happened before Partco was ultimately informed by Dinah. 3. Using cognitive dissonance theory, explain the actions of Pat, Dinah, and Fred.
Certification, which stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, is both a professional certification in sustainable building practices, and a grading scale on a structure’s environmental impact and sustainability (USGBC, 2008). A LEED certified professional is recognized as having completed the required course of curriculum in LEED and has successfully passed the LEED Certification ...
Cognitive dissonance is when there is an inconsistency between an individual’s attitude(s) and their behavior. I think the theory applies more to Pat than either Dinah or Fred. Dinah displayed appropriate ethical standards throughout the ordeal and her actions definitely supported her thoughts. When what she thought was appropriate action was not taken, she did what she felt was right and reported the issue to Partco. This seems consistent with her thoughts.
Fred as well seemed to have his actions confirm his thoughts. His thoughts and actions both are unethical, but consistent with each other. Pat, on the other hand, did display cognitive dissonance. When shown the file, she immediately felt that her company was committing fraud. Pat did show the file to Fred, but failed to act appropriately after Fred convinced her to drop the matter. Her failure to act demonstrates a difference between her initial thoughts and ultimate actions.