Final answer:
The vendor's offer of a kickback to John Doe for increasing the company's orders can be considered an unethical attempt to secure sales, resembling machine politics. Kickbacks can lead to corruption, inefficiencies, and both financial and legal consequences.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the scenario where John Doe, a procurement manager at That's the Deal Company, is offered a 5% kickback by a vendor contingent on the company's orders exceeding a certain amount, this kickback is indeed being used as a means for the vendor to secure sales. Such kickbacks in a business context are typically considered unethical and may even be illegal, depending on jurisdiction. Despite being positioned as a mutually beneficial solution in the short term, this vendor's offer compromises transparency and the integrity of the procurement process.
Kickbacks like this can create a conflict of interest and can lead to a form of corruption similar to that seen in machine politics, where the exchange of favors, in this case monetary, aims to ensure repeat business or preferential treatment. This is not a fair or democratic way of doing business, can often lead to inefficiencies and may result in long-term damage to reputations and relationships, as well as legal repercussions.