Ethical Dilemma Analysis: Executive Spending Gone Crazy

During my tenure as a sales assistant at an equities broker in New York City , I worked for the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who frequently asked the members of the sales assistant desk to perform innumerable personal tasks. The manager's attitude caused conflict and unhappiness among staff members, but the New York office's numbers far outperformed the results of any of the other firm's offices. Many would argue that the CEO was unethical in his personal use of subordinates but others would say that his management style was the main factor in the financial success of the firm.


Introduction


After college, I worked for two years as a sales assistant for a French equities broker. The office employed approximately thirty salespeople and sales-traders who were assisted by six sales assistants. While there was a head of the sales assistant desk, I contractually reported directly to the CEO. My job duties included planning travel, negotiating annual travel contracts, booking and attending meetings with investors, executives and financial analysts, and other various office tasks. The CEO was very powerful as the New York office was highly profitable.


The CEO had a very harsh management style. Early in my tenure at the firm, the CEO yelled across the trading floor because I had provided him the wrong report. (This error was corrected in about one minute, but he did not ask whether I had the data he needed, he just assumed I had wasted one business day working on the wrong thing. Though I quickly provided the correct information, my embarrassment among my colleagues was already firmly in place.)


In addition to his rough management, the CEO also assigned the sales assistants to do a variety of personal tasks ranging from picking up clothing from Hermes to scheduling doggie summer camp for his dog; or from picking up sushi lunch in the rain to tracking down a specific style of Puma shoes for his friend in  Paris. These tasks created problems in the workplace by putting the employees in an uncomfortable position, taking time away from duties more related to corporate needs, and were arguably a misuse of company resources.