Peter Jensen, the purchasing agent for a local plant of the Obion Electronics Division, was considering the possible purchase of a component from a new supplier. The component's purchase price, $2.90, compared favorably with the standard price of $3.10. Given the quantity that would be purchased, Peter knew that the favorable price variance would help offset an unfavorable variance for another component. By offsetting the unfavorable variance, Peter's overall performance report would be impressive and good enough to help Peter qualify for the annual bonus. More importantly, a good performance rating this year would help Peter secure a position at division headquarters at a significant salary increase. Purchase of the part, however, presented Peter with a dilemma. Following company policy, Peter made inquiries regarding the reliability of the new supplier and the part's quality. The reports were negative. The supplier had a reputation for making the first two or three deliveries on schedule, but being unreliable from then on. Worse, the part itself was of questionable quality. The number of defective units was only slightly higher than that for other suppliers, but the life of the component was 25 percent less than what normal sources provided. If the part were purchased from this new supplier, no problems with deliveries would surface for several months. The problem of shorter life would cause eventual customer dissatisfaction after the final product began to be used. If all went well, Peter expected to be at headquarters within six months. Peter saw very little personal risk associated with a decision to purchase the part from the new supplier. By the time any problems surfaced, they would belong to Peter's successor. Required - Follow the Ethics Assignment Guidelines and prepare an organized essay that addresses the following: - Identify the primary stakeholders and consider their viewpoints. Who has a stake in Peter's decision? How would they view the consequences of Peter's choice