The Main Arguments for Foley to Counter: CEOs and Their Responsibilities Striving for the benefit of the organization, as well as the well-being of all its members and the provision of high-quality services to the customers and supporters of the organization is generally considered the duty of the company’s COO. However, in practice, it often becomes clear that, for the sake of staying afloat, the company often has to sacrifice some of its principles and choose the options that might be regarded as not quite ethical. In the case study in question, as a new COO and a leader with quite a little experience, Foley has to deal with the organization’s financial issues. Even though according to the hospital’s state of affairs, it will be more financially rewarding to become a for-profit company, Foley believes that the hospital should retain its position as a charity organization (Gentile 1). It must be admitted that Foley’s opponents provide several reasonable arguments. To start with, the fact that the organization is suffering a range of financial issues should be considered. Unless these issues are solved, the organization is most likely to go bankrupt, which makes the option of going for-profit rather tolerable. The next issue to consider is Foley’s lack of experience. Truly, she has deserved her position of a COO, yet the steps that happen to be the pivoting point of a company’s evolution should be taken by someone with the least bit of experience. The last, but not the least, the issue concerning the motivation of the employees should be considered. While it is clear that, the given organization being a non-profit company from the very start, its employees had other motivations than financial profit – presumably, these were job satisfaction, acquisition of new skills and feeling self-important by helping others. However, the question is whether the staff of the given organization is going to be just as driven when they realize that they will have to work in even less inspiring conditions, i.e., with sufficient lack of funding. Levers and Arguments for Foley to Check Her Argumentation: Analysis As the arguments above show, Foley has several arguments to fight against in her attempt to keep the hospital run on a charity basis. Foley is not in charge of the entire company and is allowed to supervise only a small part of the processes within it, which is going to slow the process of the organization’s transformation, setting it to a much slower, bureaucratic pace. However, by far the most compelling argument concerns the risk that Foley is putting the organization in. The fact that Foley’s plan means that the fate of the entire company and the people working in it will be put at stake begs the question of whether taking risks is worth it. After all, it is important to keep in mind that, unless the experiment turns out to be successful, the organization will most likely go bankrupt, and its staff will be left without jobs. Another obvious argument that Foley will have to face is the fact that she has little influence to help the organization change so that it could provide the services of the same quality to its customers and job satisfaction to its members. Indeed, being only one of the managers, Foley does not have all