Case Study Of The Club Fundraising Case

1302 Words3 Pages

LEB 323 Ethics Assignment
1. Identify the dilemma you are discussing and describe the choices the decision maker is facing. In this paper I will be discussing the Club Fundraising Case. Kalaya, the decision maker, is facing an ethical dilemma as to whether or not she should continue asking people for donations to her club. Kalaya’s organization has recently enacted a rule that she believes to be a violation of her freedom of expression. Outraged, several club members created a petition in the hopes that the rule would be revoked. Her friend, Frances, has decided to retaliate against the organization’s leadership further by telling potential donors not to make contributions until the petition is addressed, and has asked Kalaya to do the same. …show more content…

Her first duty would be to honor her commitment to the organization. She must consider that by pausing her fundraising efforts, she has the potential to negatively impact the financial capabilities of the organization as well as relations with its donors in the present and for the future. On the other hand, Kalaya also has a duty to remain loyal to her friend. There is a risk that continuing to fundraise may offend Frances and jeopardize their friendship. Conversely, by choosing not to partake in fundraising activities, there is a possibility that she may hurt other members of the organization who are working hard to raise money for the club. Above all, Kalaya has a duty to herself to protect her personal freedom. She must ultimately make the decision that is most appropriate for …show more content…

The first heuristic that comes into play is the false consensus effect. Kalaya may falsely believe that other members of the organization, the club’s officers, and even the potential donors may share similar views to her regarding freedom of expression. Consequently, this may lead her to think that her protest against fundraising is justified, supported by others, and ultimately is the most effective way to have the rule revoked. The second heuristic at work in this scenario is obedience to authority. Kalaya may feel a responsibility to her superiors to continue her fundraising efforts because she is worried about what they might think of her despite the unethical rule they enacted against members’ individual freedoms. The third heuristic that may influence Kalaya’s decision would be over-optimism. She may have a greater sense of confidence that her decision to stop fundraising will convince the club’s officers to reverse the rule. Her heightened conviction of the protest’s success may backfire, resulting in the rule staying in place and the loss of all the funds she could have acquired during the strike. Lastly, Kalaya may be affected by role morality. In her role as a committee member, she has a duty to collect donations for the organization and strive for its success. Yet in her role as a friend, Kalaya has a moral duty to support her friend’s protesting efforts against what she perceives to be

More about Case Study Of The Club Fundraising Case

Open Document