BUSI 615 Week 4 Integration of Faith and Learning main post Example

Integration of Faith and Learning: Main Post

BUSI 615 Logistics, Integration of Faith and Learning (main post)

Thread by [Student Name]

The prompt and the stove manufacturer are composites standing in for the course's own assignment and the Week 4 business ethics lecture; the research cited is real, and the requirements follow Liberty's public course guide for BUSI 615.

Main Post

This week's business ethics lecture asked us to see ethical choices inside ordinary management decisions rather than in rare scandals. Logistics is full of them. Consider Harlan Ridge Stoveworks, the composite Pennsylvania stove maker I have used in our forums. In early November, a supplier's late shipment of auger motors leaves the plant able to build about 600 fewer pellet stoves than its dealers want before Thanksgiving. Sales managers propose a simple fix: keep quoting the usual two-week delivery, ship to whichever dealers complain loudest and sort out the shortfall in December. The master production schedule and the available-to-promise figures from this week's reading show that the plant cannot keep those promises.

Honest measures and a yes that means yes

Scripture treats accurate measures as a matter of worship rather than mere commercial custom. In Proverbs, a rigged balance is called an abomination to the Lord, while an honest weight delights Him (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Proverbs 11:1). Inside a modern plant, the scale is the information system: inventory records, schedules and promise dates are the measures customers rely on. Quoting a two-week delivery while knowing the plan says five weeks is a false weight entered into a database. Jesus' teaching in the Sermon on the Mount presses further, telling His hearers that a plain yes or a plain no should be enough, with no oaths needed to prop up what they say (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Matthew 5:37). A promise date is a yes given in writing, and a firm that treats it as a sales tactic has stopped saying what it means.

Joseph's work in Egypt shows the same integrity applied to planning. Warned of seven poor harvests, he stored grain through the good years and then sold it openly to everyone who came, Egyptians and foreigners alike (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Genesis 41:53-57). His plan worked because it was built on the true picture he had been given, not on what the court wished to hear. A master production schedule serves the same purpose for a stove plant: it is the true picture, and the firm's promises should be drawn from it.

Honesty here is also good logistics. Lee et al. (1997) described the rationing game: when a supplier divides scarce stock according to the size of each order, customers inflate their orders to secure a larger share and then cancel when supply recovers. If Harlan Ridge rewards whoever pushes hardest, its dealers will quickly learn to overstate demand, and next season's forecast will be built on phantom orders. Truthful dates and a transparent allocation rule remove the incentive to game the system.

Fairness to the smaller dealer

The shortage also raises a question of justice. Large dealers carry more sway with sales staff than the family hearth shop in a rural county, yet the rural customer heating a farmhouse may need the stove more urgently. Carter and Jennings (2002) proposed that logistics managers treat issues such as safety, the environment, diversity among suppliers, human rights and community obligations as parts of one organization-wide social responsibility rather than separate problems. Seen through that framework, allocation is not only a commercial choice but one with consequences for people outside the firm. The law given to Israel forbade judges to bend a verdict in favor of either the needy or the mighty and required them to decide a neighbor's case justly (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Leviticus 19:15), and a rule that serves only the loudest customers is a form of partiality.

What the firm should do

My recommendation is a policy with three parts. First, quote dates from the actual plan, even when they disappoint, and update dealers each week as motors arrive. Second, allocate the shortfall by a published rule, such as each dealer's share of last season's sales with a reserve for orders tied to homes without other heat, rather than by who calls most often. Third, share the cost honestly: if the supplier's delay was foreseeable, Harlan Ridge should absorb some of the dealers' losses, perhaps through freight credits. This approach may cost a few sales to competitors who promise more aggressively, and I do not think we should pretend otherwise. But a firm whose yes means yes builds the trust that makes the next season's forecast, and the next season's relationships, worth having.

I expect some colleagues will find this policy too costly in a competitive market, and I would like to hear that case argued. I would also welcome responses on one point in particular: is allocation by last season's share truly fair, or does it simply lock in the advantages of dealers who were already large?

References

Carter, C. R., & Jennings, M. M. (2002). Logistics social responsibility: An integrative framework. Journal of Business Logistics, 23(1), 145-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2158-1592.2002.tb00020.x

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Lee, H. L., Padmanabhan, V., & Whang, S. (1997). Information distortion in a supply chain: The bullwhip effect. Management Science, 43(4), 546-558. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.43.4.546