Forced Resignation of Patricia Dunn Is Necessary

Abstract

This paper examines why Patricia Dunn should be forced to resign from Hewlett Packard (HP). Dunn used pretexting, an illegal act, to successfully find the leak in the company. This paper looks at other ways Dunn could have achieved the same goal. Considering the deontological and utilitarian implications proves that Dunn actions were not justified. Dunn felt it was her duty to find this person responsible for leaking the information. This was the entire board’s duty and failed at her duty to communicate to them the issue. Ultimately Dunn is responsible for this illegal act and looking at the utilitarian side, for the greater good of the company she should resign.

Keywords: Hewlett Packard (HP)

Introduction/Background

Patricia Dunn was forced to resign from Hewlett-Packard due to the way she investigated the leak in the company. Her intentions were good but she caused more negative than good. She used pretexting, an illegal act, to successfully find the leak. Examining deontological and utilitarian issues exemplifies that Dunn should be forced to resigned. There could have been alternate, more legal avenues of approach before resulting to pretexting and collecting personal information about each board member. This paper will examine why Dunn resignation is necessary, prevented measures that could have been taken and the moral issues involved.

In 2005, the company realized there was a leak within the company. Dunn felt that it was her duty to the company to find this leak, to prevent any valuable information from being sent out. In her testimony before congress she states, “The most sensitive aspects of a company’s business come before its board: strategy, executive succession acquisitions, business plans, product devolvement and key supplier relations.” She felt that all those reasons would make her company lose its edge in the market (Barron 2007). She hired a private investigator to look into the leak. This investigator used pretexting to access personal information. According to dictionary.com, “pretexting is the practice of deceiving individuals into surrendering personal information for fraudulent purposes.” This means that the investigator was impersonating employees and journalists to obtain their phone records. In addition, they were tracking work and personal emails using embedded software to gain more information. Dunn did not immediately know this was happening but knew once she received vital information covering the leak (Donovan 2007). The board was notified of the investigation only when Dunn brought up the fact that George Keyworth was the known informant. These events lead to the Dunn resignation and charges filed on the HP company, resulting in the hurting the trust and reputation of the company.