1. Midterm Case: Dilemma at Devil's Den
This case revolves around ethical issues involving Susan who had a “part-time job in the the
campus snack bar, The Devil’s Den” (Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-302). The Den id managed by a
contract with an external company, College Food Services (CFS). During the day there are no student
managers but a full-time manager employed by CFS to supervise the Den. With high turnover rates and
low pay the Den has a hard time finding and keeping employees.
The problems that Susan identified with the night shirt operations of the Devil’s Den included
both customers and employees stealing “food almost whenever they wanted” Susan goes on to state that,
“I was also bothered by the lack of responsibility of the managers to get the employees to do their work”
(Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-303). Susan is also unsure if CFS is aware of the issues going on or if
these issues were just simply being ignored.
The causes of these problems include low wages, tolerant student management that has no formal
training, poor inventory control, and the fact that the food storage room is often keep unlocked or when it
is locked all employees still have access to it. With the high turnover rate of employees at the Devil’s Den
these employees tend to lack a sense of company loyalty and commitment. “This lack of commitment
from the employee does involve costs. These costs include increases in employee theft, a higher absentee
rate… and a decrease in the quality of that product. A work force that does not feel loyalty to its employer
will not work to the best of their abilities, and the constant influx of new workers affects the quality of the
company’s product as well as the efficiency of production” (Bartkowiak, 1993, p. 812).
Management is supposed to “set the example for others by working always within the law and the
policies of the organization” (Sauser, Jr., 2005, p. 346). The problem with is that “students managers were
previous employees chosen by other student managers and the full-time CFS day manger on the basis of
their ability to work on their length of employment. They received no further formal training or written
rules beyond what they had already learned by working there” (Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-302). This

2. causes the student management to contribute to this unethical behavior since the student management
makes no efforts to establish leadership, control, or discipline. Since the student management does only
the minimum to maintain the status quo these issues have been allowed to continue and has caused the
Devil’s Den to be a toxic work culture.
The Ethics Resource Center states that, “Business Ethics refers to clear standards and norms that
help employees to distinguish right from wrong behavior at work” (Joseph, 2003, p. 2). While Susan feels
she has a responsibility to report the ethical situations she seems unsure of what would be the best route
for her to take to accomplish her goals while still keeping her position. Susan’s risk evaluation based on
priorities to see this ethical behavior corrected does provide her with justification for her actions.
However she also risks being ostracized and possibly losing her job over this issue, but by not saying
anything about what is going and allowing people to continue to steal she becomes a part of the problem.
Susan still faces this issue even after “speaking to a close friend, Mack a student manager at the
Den” about her concerns with what is going on. “Nothing was ever said to other employees about this,
and the only corrective action was that the door was locked more often, yet the key to the lock was still
available upon request to all employees during their shifts” (Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-302). If Susan
were to wait to address the issue until she became a student manager this would require her to allow this
behavior to continue which would cause a dilemma.
Susan’s perception of the situation is influenced by management’s decision to ignore what is
happening and while she is aware that CFS may not know what is going on. Susan attempts to rationalize
the problem with the belief that once she in a management position she will be better able to control the
issue and force change in the groups actions. Since her priorities are in getting a student management
position and currently she “felt that no one else really cared and may even have frowned on me trying to
take action” (Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-303). Susan continues to believe that she cannot change the
actions of others without the hierarchical authority to do so. It is therefore up to the supervisors to correct

3. the problem and what she believes will continue to be an unsolvable issue until she is in the position to
correct the norm.
A SWOT Analysis of Susan’s Situation
The other employees are influenced by the actions of management “The student managers
allowed their friends to take food for free, thereby setting bed examples for the other workers, and
allowing the employees to take what they wanted even when they were not working” (Cohen & Johnson,
2004, p. C-303). By the student managers supporting this improper action this creates an environment of
groupthink and cohesion that forms this behavior as norm since no one that has been stealing was cast
from the group. The fact that the behavior has not been deemed unacceptable has allowed employees to
continue to engage in this behavior. Since management does not any value in going against this created

4. norm of stealing. Management tends to avoid causing tension from the larger group and values
friendships over their job’s ethical responsibilities. This action that management takes only reaffirms and
strengthens this behavior.
A Flow Circle (1 leads to 2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-1, etc.….)
1. Stealing is a benefit we deserve this is what the employees use to justify their behavior
2. Stealing is accepted by management and some of those in management are even participating.
3. Observation of acceptance that continued stealing reaffirms the belief that it is acceptable.
4. Stealing has become the foundation for this groups norm and is considered acceptable.
5. This group norm reduces managements desire to counter the action which contributes to the
general belief. (Back to1)
Susan has stated that she “felt the problem was a large enough scale that action should have been
taken, not only to correct any financial loss that the Den might have experienced but also to help to give
the student employees a true sense of their responsibilities, the limits of their freedom, respect for rules,
and pride in their jobs” (Cohen & Johnson, 2004, p. C-303). Based on these feeling she has contacting
CFS should a top priority to help combat this issue. By contacting the company via e-mail she should be
able to remain anonymously while addressing the issues and excluding her from any liability. While this
first option most likely will not result in any changes. A stronger approach would be for Susan to talk to
the one full-time day manager that is employed by CFS about her concerns and hope that this manager
will confront the issue.
The best approach would be to go to CFS about the issues. CFS needs to insure that they have a
“written standard of ethical conduct; training on standards of conduct; an ethics office or telephone advice
line; and a means to report misconduct anonymously” (Joseph, 2003, p. 5). Overall the issue facing the

5. Devil’s Den will require restructuring and correcting the unethical behavior that the employees and
student managers are currently engaging in. Since it is “the organization’s right to secure and protect its
assets” (Cordeiro, 1997, p. 183). CFS should be willing to take the proper steps to insure that they will no
longer incur issues with employee theft. It would also be in the best interest of CFS to insure that all
management is trained and are aware of the code of ethics that the business has or will soon implement.
By Susan reporting what is going on directly to the company in charge she is allowing CFS not only to be
aware of the issue but to deal with it.

6. References
Bartkowiak, J. J. (1993). Trends toward part-time employment: Ethical issues. Journal of Business
Ethics,
12(10), 811. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.nu.edu/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/198025034?accountid=25320
Cohen, A.R. & Johnson, K. (2004). Dilemma at Devil’s Den. In Thompson, et al. (19th
Ed.). Crafting &
Executing Strategy (p. C-302-C-304). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irvin.
Cordeiro, W. P. (1997). Suggested management responses to ethical issues raised by technological
change. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12), 1393-1400. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.nu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/198092102?
accountid=25320
Joseph, J. (2003). National Business Ethics Survey 2003: How Employees View Business Ethics in Their
Organizations. Washington, DC: Ethics Resource Center.
Sauser, William I., Jr. (2005). Ethics in Business: Answering the Call. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(4),
345-357.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-5715-z

7. References
Bartkowiak, J. J. (1993). Trends toward part-time employment: Ethical issues. Journal of Business
Ethics,
12(10), 811. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.nu.edu/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/198025034?accountid=25320
Cohen, A.R. & Johnson, K. (2004). Dilemma at Devil’s Den. In Thompson, et al. (19th
Ed.). Crafting &
Executing Strategy (p. C-302-C-304). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irvin.
Cordeiro, W. P. (1997). Suggested management responses to ethical issues raised by technological
change. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12), 1393-1400. Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.nu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/198092102?
accountid=25320
Joseph, J. (2003). National Business Ethics Survey 2003: How Employees View Business Ethics in Their
Organizations. Washington, DC: Ethics Resource Center.
Sauser, William I., Jr. (2005). Ethics in Business: Answering the Call. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(4),
345-357.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-004-5715-z