The following 12 categories were developed and listed in Exchange, the magazine of the Brigham Young University School of Business.

Taking Things That Don’t Belong to You In the book, How to Become a Grown-Up in 468 East (ish) Steps, author Kelly Williams Brown lists step number 176 as “Do not steal more than $3 worth of office supplies per quarter.” Regardless of size or motivation, unauthorized use of someone else's property or taking property is still taking something that does not belong to you. That you have a self-imposed limit does not change the fact that there is still a taking. We experience these seemingly small ethical dilemmas daily. The point is not the amount involved, but recognizing that we have taken something that does not belong to us. For example, a chief financial officer of a large electric utility reported that after taking a cab from LaGuardia International Airport to his midtown Manhattan hotel, he asked for a receipt. The cab driver handed him a full book of blank receipts and drove away. The ability to submit receipts for an expense you did not have does not make the expense anything more than taking money from your company that is not yours to take.

Saying Things You Know Are Not True This category deals with the virtue of honesty. Assume you are trying to sell your car, one in which you had an accident but which you have repaired. If the potential buyer asks whether the car has been in an accident and you reply, “No,” then you have given false information. If you take credit for someone else’s idea or work, then you have, by your conduct, said something that is not true. If you do not give credit to others who have given you ideas or helped with a project, then you have not been forthright. If, in evaluating your team members on a school project, you certify that all carried their workload when, in fact, one of your team members was a real slacker, you have said something that was not true. If you do not disclose an accident that you had in the last year on an insurance application, you have not told the truth. If you state that you have a college degree on your résumé but have not yet graduated, you have committed an ethical breach. If, in filling out a credit application, you put the salary you have now when your employer has announced a 25% pay cut beginning next quarter, you have not told the truth.

Buying Influence or Engaging in Conflict of Interest This category finds someone in the position of conflicting loyalties. An officer of a corporation should not be entering into contracts between his company and a company that he has created as part of a sideline of work. The officer is conflicted between his duty to negotiate the best contract and price for his corporation and his interest as a business owner in maximizing his profits. In his role as an officer, he wants the most he can get at the lowest price. Bribery is a legal issue but is grounded in conflicts of interest. For example, when nine Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) executives of the NGO’s marketing affiliates were indicted and arrested, they were accused of accepting bribes from cities and countries in exchange for the award of World Cup locations and other events cities and countries sought for economic purposes. When executives for FIFA accept payments from those who seek to win contracts with FIFA, they compromise their judgment and loyalty to FIFA, that is, what is best for soccer, to which country pays the most.
A county administrator has a conflict of interest by accepting paid travel from contractors who are interested in bidding on the stadium project. Certainly, it is a good idea for the administrator to see the stadiums around the country and get an idea of the contractors’
quality of work. But the county should pay for those site visits, not the contractors. The administrator’s job as a county employee is to hire the most qualified contractor at the best price. However, the benefits of paid travel would and could vary, and contractors could use those site visits and travel perks to influence the decision on the award of the county contract for the stadium. Their interests in obtaining the contract are at odds with the county’s interest in seeking the best stadium, not the best travel perks for the administrator. The administrator's loyalties to the county and the accommodating contractors are in conflict.
In 2014, a Texas legislator discovered that lawmakers were writing to the chancellor of University of Texas at Austin (UT), requesting special consideration for friends and family members who had applied for admissions. The general admissions rate for UT applicants is 15.8%. The admission rate for those who had letters from legislators was 58.7%. Public outrage resulted because of the perception of political favoritism—that the chancellor's duty to the university conflicted with his need to have good relationships with legislators for budget and tuition rate purposes. The issue was whether the admissions process was compromised as a result of deference to the legislators writing letters. Those who are involved in these conflict-of-interest situations often protest, “But I would never allow that to influence me. The ethical violation is the conflict. Whether the conflict can or will influence those it touches is not the issue, for neither party can prove conclusively that a quid pro quo was not intended. The possibility exists, and it creates suspicion. Conflicts of interest are not difficult. They are managed in one of two ways: Don't do it, or disclose it...................

Discussion Questions 1. Consider the following situations and determine from the tournament. As you categorize this which of the 12 categories each issue fits into. dilemma, be sure to think about the aftermath.

a. PGA golfer Phil Mickelson was scheduled Mr. Mickelson did play the 2010 Masters, to play in the 2009 Masters Tournament where his wife Amy made her first public when he learned that his wife Amy had appearance on the 13th hole of the last round.
cancer. Mr. Mickelson had sponsors for his Mr. Mickelson described his win that year as participation but felt that he needed to be being “for Amy.” Discuss any lessons you can with his wife and children. He withdrew glean about balancing from this experience.

b. A manager at a bank branch requires those employees who arrive late for work to clean the restrooms at the bank. The branch does Nave a janitorial service, but the manager's motto is “If you're late, the bathrooms must look great.” An employee finds the work of cleaning the bathrooms in her professional clothes demeaning. Which category applies?

c. Jack Walls is the purchasing manager for a small manufacturer. He has decided to award a contract for office supplies to Office Mart.
No one knows of Jack’s decision yet, but Office Mart is anxious for the business and offers Jack a three-day ski vacation in Telluride, Colorado. Jack would love to take the trip but can't decide if there is an ethical question.
Help Jack decide whether there is.
2. In November 2008, golfer J. P. Hayes was participating in the PGA Tour's Qualifying Tournament, often called Q-School. Mr. Hayes, then 42, discovered after the second round of play that he had used a Titleist prototype ball for play that day, a ball not approved for PGA play. After his discovery, Mr. Hayes called a PGA official to let him know what had happened. As he suspected, Mr. Hayes Defining Ethics Section A 19 participate in the PGA’s top tournaments for the year. Without O-School status, golfers do not qualify automatically for tournament play and have to hope for getting into tournaments by other means.
The difference in earnings for the year for the golfer who does not qualify at Q-School versus the golfer who does is millions. Mr. Hayes said, “I’m kind of at a point in my career where if | have a light year, it might be a good thing. I’m looking forward to playing less and spending more time with my family. It’s not the end of the world. It will be fine. It is fine.”®
Classify Mr. Hayes under the ethical schools of thought. Describe his credo.
3.lvan Fernandez Anaya is a world-class runner who stopped short of crossing the finish line in a cross-country race in Burlada, Spain, because he realized that Abel Mutai, who had held a comfortable lead throughout the race, thought he had crossed the finish line but had stopped short (10 yards). His Kenyan not being as good as his Spanish, lvan motioned and gestured to Abel to cross the finish line ahead of him. Abel caught on, finished first, and Ivan took second place.
lvan's coach said he “wasted an opportunity.” Ivan responded, “| did what | had to do. | didn't deserve was disqualified from Q-School. Achievement at Q-School results in a type of automatic right to to win it.” Into which categories would you place the ethical issues involved here?