Keith is a medical representative of a medical device company. At a high school reunion, he met his former classmate Tammy, who is now an operations manager of a medical group.
Tammy mentioned during the gathering that her company planned to replace the body composition analysers for several medical centres under the group. She then consulted Keith’s professional advice on the quality of the latest model launched by Brand A, which is the fastest in measurement time amongst similar analysers in the market.
Keith replied that Brand B, another brand represented by his company, just launched a new body composition analyser and claimed that its functionality was the best despite the price was slightly higher than Brand A. Keith persuaded Tammy to recommend Brand B to her company instead and undertook to offer a smart body scale to Tammy as “free trial”. Tammy agreed to help eventually.
On the next day, Keith visited Tammy’s office to follow up the procurement matter and presented the smart body scale to Tammy. Daisy, the assistant operations manager, overheard that Keith offered a product to Tammy for trial. Subsequently, Tammy instructed Daisy to recommend Brand B’s analyser in the market research report.
In fact, Daisy learned from a market research that Brand A’s new device had the best performance in measurement time and accuracy in the market due to its patented technology. On the contrary, Brand B’s new device was obviously not a better option as its quality was just on par with other similar products in the market. Daisy, as Tammy’s subordinate, dared not object to her supervisor’s instruction but on the other hand, she considered that it was unethical to conceal the facts. Daisy was in a dilemma…