Reference no: EM133025142

Ethical Dilemma Scenario

The Civil Service Board in a midsize city in Indiana decided that a written exam should be given to all candidates for promotion for supervisor. A written test would assess mental skills and would open access to all personnel who wanted to apply for the position. The board believed a written exam for promotion would be completely fair and objective because it eliminated subjective judgements nd personal favoritism regarding candidate's qualifications.

Maxine Othman, manager of social service agency, loved to see her employees earn and grow to their full potential. When a rare opening for supervising clerk occurred. Maxine quickly decided to give Sheryl Hines a shot at the job. Sheryl had been with the agency for 17 years and had shown herself to be a true leader. In her new position, Sheryl worked hard at becoming a good supervisor, just as she had always worked hard at being a top-notch clerk. She paid attention to the human aspects of employee problems and introduced modern management techniques that strengthened the entire agency. Because of the board's new ruling, however, Sheryl would have to complete the exam in an open competition - anyone could sign up and take it, even a new employee. The board wanted the candidate with the highest score to get the job, but allowed Maxine, as manger of the agency to have the final say.

Because Sheryl had accepted the provisional opening and proved herself on the job, Maxine was upset that the entire clerical force was deemed qualified to take the test.

Sherly placed 12th, while a newly hired clerk placed 1st. The board wants Maxine to honor the objective of the written test, but can the test really assess fairly who is the right person for the job.

Question:

If you were the manger in this case, explain what you would do and why?