started this Saturday.”
And possibly, as even I have done in the past, “I’ll pocket the insurance money and come out ahead.”
This is a valid dilemma that many people face. It pays to take the time to do a more lengthy analysis of the situation.I will take a model from ethics and apply it to the situation. Be patient with the process and the cream will rise to the top!
This is a valid dilemma that many people face. It pays to take the time to do a more lengthy analysis of the situation.I will take a model from ethics and apply it to the situation. Be patient with the process and the cream will rise to the top!
1. Review the facts: There is a home improvement to be made that requires, labor, expertise, accurate materials, adequate tools, miscellaneous sundries and possibly a timeline for completion.
2. Estimate the Problem: Setting aside that a contractor will have more in depth knowledge of the best materials to purchase for the situation, and already own the tools; the main conflict is paying for the contractor’s labor versus spending one’s own time.
3. Solutions that could be possible: Do it myself, hire a contractor, or pay the unemployed neighbor/brother-in-law/uncle – cash.
4. Outcomes of each solution above:
a. Do it myself: The job gets done using my time in the denomination of labor. Any unexpected findings or mistakes took more time and money. My level of expertise shows in the outcome. Best case scenario: money was saved by my time and I am happy with the outcome.
b. Pay the unemployed neighbor/brother-in-law/uncle – cash: The job may or may not have the desired outcome. Either guilt or pleasure with the job outcome could have implications for the future of said relationship: awkward or friendly. Money may have been saved – with the reality pending on the quality of the job outcome. Risk of job outcome and risk with relationship were taken.
c. Hire a contractor: Two outcomes emerge depending on the quality of the contractor – which is why referrals are important. First and best outcome is that expectations were met and exceeded. There may be a realization during the job process that more detail and skill was required than originally thought. Your home was disrupted for less time. You spent your time doing profitable things (both for the soul and the wallet). Risk was very low because contractor carried insurances to guard you against any injuries occurring on your property, any job related mistakes with costly repairs and many other things that fall under liability and worker’s compensation insurance.
The second outcome is that you are disappointed with a shoddy job or the poor ethics of the contractor choice you made.
5. Likely impact of each outcome listed above:
a. Do it myself: If the job goes well, the impact is one of pride and though time was spent and unexpected issues arose, you felt you came out ahead by spending your extra time rather than cash, to do the job yourself.
b. Pay the unemployed neighbor/brother-in-law/uncle – cash: The cash helps said person through a tough time. You are happy or not so happy with the results. The relationship in the future with this person hinges on the job outcome. Want to take that risk?
c. Contractor: If you did your homework and hired a qualified contractor, you are happy with the outcome and no longer feel any sting of spending the money on hired labor because you realize the job has a professional appearance, the unexpected findings were remedied with more skill and ease than you would have been able to deal with, and the timeline allowed you to enjoy your home sooner than if you had tackled the project yourself. Invisible risk benefits like injury or damage liability were realized.
6. Value of each outcome: Without belaboring any point already mentioned, if one simply looks at the value that the money path followed, it speaks for itself.
In the do-it-yourself scenario, even if the lowest amount of money spent is the outcome, there is a risk that the quality of the job may not last as long as having it professionally done, which means the lower amount spent was not a good investment in the long run.
Cash payment to a friend in need will bring them a short term benefit but the relationship is at risk pending the outcome.
In the do-it-yourself scenario, even if the lowest amount of money spent is the outcome, there is a risk that the quality of the job may not last as long as having it professionally done, which means the lower amount spent was not a good investment in the long run.
Cash payment to a friend in need will bring them a short term benefit but the relationship is at risk pending the outcome.
Payment to a contractor helps Main Street keep tradespeople employed and able to maintain health benefits. An employer stays in business and the employees spend their earnings on taxes and on consuming goods that create a strong economy. Notice how the money path in this scenario included insurance, safeguarding you against risk and putting money into that sector as well. The money also flowed to the manufacturer who had the best material solution for your project.
7. The next steps are to evaluate all of the above, make a decision and then defend your decision against its main weaknesses. This is called the RESOLVEDD (yes, two D’s) method (Pfeiffer & Forsberg, 2005).
I hope you enjoyed this lesson in Dilemma Solving 101 – and happy home improvements to you!
References:
1. Pfeiffer, Raymond F. and Forsberg, Ralph P. Ethics On The Job, 3rd ed. ( Wadsworth, 2005).
No comments:
Post a Comment