Date: 23 February 2009
TPC: Decision Making and Problem Solving Day 2
Writer: Jackie Cremer (A-Team)
Present: Devanada(PF), John (Spk), Clark(Scr), Jono(DA), Chris(Time), Geoff(SF)
Our team goal for the day was to make sure everyone's voice is heard and opinion is considered. The team was structured differently, with the roles in the Vanatin case, which helped us to reach this goal, since interdependence was necessary. I think this step will help us to continue having more sessions where everyone in the group is more equally contributing.
We ultimately decided we would cut advertising of Vanatin in order to fund more research and possibly develop a safer version. Many member's roles had very strong opinions concerning the drug and this kept us from reaching a decision easily. John, who was playing Cyrus Booth, Chairman at Booth, reminded us of the ethics of the company and comparing the profits to lives lost. Devanada, the consumer advocate, worked as our DA and made sure we were considering all of our publics, including our customers. And Clark, the doctor, reminded us that he had not seen any side effects from Vanatin and would prefer to keep prescribing it.
We also helped each other to understand the differences between Utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and ethical formalism. To do this, we used the Vanatin case as an example and talked about the motives behind using each method to use each type of ethical decision making.
The A-team decided early on that attendance was critical. This high expectation for each other, along with our general enjoyment of working together, has helped us to avoid problems with attendance by knowing we keep each other accountable.