According to the discussion, Lilly and her family members are well-known in the community and their reputations have often been stainless. Both employees of the conflict and potential charges of it are influenced in a negative way. Moreover, rumors have turned into a hazardous and intimidating accusations and dirty notes left for Lilly and it is now on behalf of a manager to solve this conflict. At the macro level reputation of the company is influenced greatly. Consequentialist: the rightness of the decision is based on the consequences, i.e. it is relevant to apply utilitarian paradigm in solving this problem. In the given case there are no obvious consequences, but mere suppositions. This approach is relevant in case the outcome is known. Therefore, I will take serious actions, such as employees dismissal only by fact. Deontologist: decision is tied to duty and obligation. From this perspective, it is relevant to take necessary measures in case there is a real love affair between Lilly and our client. It would be challenging to verify these data, but if it was true, then it would be necessary to apply for ethical and moral concerns and talk to Lilly about her reputation, moral duties etc.
Virtue ethics: decision is based on who am I? In this case Lilly would be motivated to give up this sinuous relation with a married man or she would be dismissed. This approach is effective in case a woman values her job and her familys reputation. Still, to apply this approach would be rather difficult for me, because I would believe not my eyes, but my ears, which listen to gossips and rumors. As for me, I would like to find out the truth. I would make the employees come to the general meeting and ask them to discuss this situation. If someone knows something, please, tell it, if not, keep silence otherwise he will be dismissed.