Joaquin was employed as a senior analyst for a medical research facility. His specialty has been adding to another medicinal device to distinguish HIV, a deadly incurable virus, quicker and less expensive and promised a prototype should be ready soon. After the results were calculated they were disappointing as very few samples were tested positive in relation to what was expected. Worried about the low genuine positives recognized in HIV cases, senior supervisors choose to gather with their investigative guides to figure out whether the device is adequate or if there is a superior approach to assessing the information. Prior to the meeting, Joaquin's manager requests that he trim the information by reporting outcomes about just from specific results, and channel out examples with low yields. Joaquin is uncomfortable with trimming and contends with his supervisor that the SAB2 ought to see the majority of their investigations, unfiltered and separated, in light of the fact that its critical data that could be letting them know something about infection stage or test execution.
His manager expresses that as long as they do not lie about the numbers, there's no damage in sifting. Joaquin then counters his boss by trying to explain to him that using flowcharts to demonstrate the results and by giving out truthful information, the SAB might be convinced. However, the boss still continues to argue and is unwilling to relent and to an extent, Joaquin realizes why, as it might harm their business. There are two major problems with this case, and that is first, the preliminary results were disappointing as 80% positive analysis were promised, but only 60% were delivered. Secondly, Joaquin’s profession was at stake as he was told to trim the data, which was a demand of an unethical action.
There are certain ethical, professional, and legal issues violated in this case for which, a three step recommendation that would be provided towards the end of the report. We must take into account that ethically, profit through the satisfaction of consumers is the end ploy of business as compared to only profits.
Major Problems of the Case
Elie Wiesel rightly said, “There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” The ‘ethical’ behavior of every individual contributes to an organization as a whole. In order for the employees to be ethical and honest, the leader has to set an example. Here, Joaquin’s boss shows unethical behavior and puts Joaquin in a pressurized position. Joaquin seems passionate about his work as he argues with his boss about trimming data. To truly increase productivity and improve their performance, Joaquin’s boss should create a positive and healthy corporate culture, which he fails to do so. There were two major problems here – Firstly, the preliminary results were disappointing as 80% positive analysis were promised, but only 60% were delivered. The reason behind this could be the time constraints that they had as it mentions that they got an additional of six months as well. Secondly, Joaquin’s profession was at stake as he was told to trim the data, which was a demand of an unethical action. Joaquin had to make a calculated decision and save his job. However, he had to also convince the SAB that the project would be helpful and valid.
The boss’ unethical behavior has created a negative atmosphere for Joaquin as he is now confused as to save the project or his job. Joaquin knows that listening to his boss is going to bring up a lot of questions from the SAB as they would look for the sensitivity and specificity data. Joaquin has to follow ‘employee code of ethics’ and either save his job or try and save the project. Joaquin would also be faced with questioning about the preliminary results as they were given the gift of time and the results were weak. Being in Joaquin’s position there are a lot of ways to address his problems that will be discussed further in this case.
Violations
Ethics has various different categories and its concerns are not specifically only targeted towards the treatment of human beings, ethics also arises during the process of collection, analysis and reporting of social research data. Learning to design good research assumes that the methods used to collect data will have intellectual integrity and be trustworthy. Once the data is collected it can be manipulated in various ways that undermine the aims of social science. Misconduct in data analysis can be classified as either being “covert” or “overt”.
Drastically reduces variability and can create significant results. And covert misconduct are of three different types which are trimming, capitalization on chance and selective reporting. Trimming basically involves removing outliers from the data to make the data seem more significant towards the direction of the hypothesis in the case of the given Joaquin was a senior researcher who violated or was forced to violate various legal, ethical and professional codes of conduct to pass the medical device by trimming information.
The ethical code, which the medical research company violated, was trimming the data to only use samples which produce higher yields and eliminate samples which showed lower yields to improve the reliably and outcome of the experiment. In the U.A.E workers or people who practice pharmaceuticals or scientific experimenting are forced to follow a set or rules or conduct which prevent them from manipulating or interfering with any sort of scientific research. Honestly and integrity and respect were the three main ethical conducts which need to be followed. Honesty is according to the U.A.E rule for codes and conduct is striving for honesty in all scientific communications. This includes honestly reporting data methods and procedures and publication status. U.A.E workers are prohibited from falsifying or misinterpreting data, which might deceive colleagues, research sponsors or the public which will lead to fines and even jail time for the people involved in the situation. The fine or penalization usually depends on the severity of the case or situation. The second principle which the U.A.E ethical law states is that “Integrity must be seen to be honest and fair in all their dealings. They will never take advantage of their privileged position for personal gain”. In the case study Joaquin’s boss did not maintain integrity, Joaquin’s boss took the advantage of his higher organizational powers to prevent Joaquin from portraying the original findings of the medical device and if the device went onto the market and failed to provide accurate results Joaquin would be put in more trouble than his boss as he is directly responsible for the act. So Joaquin’s boss is taking a huge risk by providing the scientific advisors with false hopes about a device which still far from providing or determining accurate results of HIV. “Respect is a prime concern it must be for the good of every patient and other members of the community”. Respect is an important principal when taking a ethical decision. In the case provided Joaquin and his boss broke the respect for not just the advisory board members but also for the most important stakeholder of the business which is the customers, if the product goes on to get accepted and funded without accurate results to the public, it might cause problems to the consumers and may even lead to extreme cases of false information and and betrayal of trust for customers as the device has provided them with inaccurate results. Doing so is illegal in the U.A.E and can lead to a heavy penalty.
Legal codes broken under the U.A.E law are not considered to be petty crimes. Companies that don’t abide to rules and laws of the U.A.E research and scientific law’s are put into serious legal problems and the government has the right to sue and shut down the research facility .Joaquin’s boss in this case is reluctant to listen to publish the real results of the medical device and instead wants to prove only higher sensitivity numbers instead of providing valuable information and flowcharts of the numbers they began with and metadata groupings and analysis, Joaquin has the right to legal report his boss and take action to make sure that he doesn’t have to listen to his instructions due to his authoritative power. This process would involve a court case in the U.A.E in front of a judge with legal papers and evidence, even though this would be a tedious process it would be a morally and legally right thing to do for Joaquin, this would stop the medical device from destroying many lives in the long term.
Professional codes of conduct are ethical benchmarks for professionals or employees to follow within the organization while respecting the local laws. The most important law involves the employees provide respect for each other including colleagues, interns and bosses. In the case study Joaquin’s boss dose not listen to Joaquin’s argument and instead persist that certain results should be filtered. Joaquin believes that showing all the sample findings would be more useful as it could help identify the disease stages but, Joaquin’s boss Is reluctant to listen and
Believes that’s the only way to get the project funded is by hiding true certain information related to the testing, this is considered illegal and unprofessional from the bosses side as he is not taking into account his employees concerns or opinions.