Type/ Format: Essay
Select a business ethics problem or dilemma that you have faced, or which has arisen in an organization of which you have been part, either as an employee, a student, or a manager.
The company must not be named, and the issue will be unethical leadership and mispractices in the technology sector.
·
Briefly describe the basic details of the case and identify and discuss the main business ethics issues involved.
·
Set out the main responses, solutions, or courses of action that could have been considered in relation to the problem evaluate these options using ethical theories discussed in the sessions (hints: chapters 1 to 5 contain the main theories and tools for this purpose. Adopt an analytical and pluralistic approach for a Good or Excellent assignment. Please refer to core text pp 125-6 for an explanation of the approach.)
·
What decision was finally made? To what extent do you believe that this was the best option, and why? (Ditto hints outlined in 3)
Add introduction, and sections as well
Assessment 2 Assessment 2 Revision Slides 1 Assessment 2 Revision PART 1 Evaluating Business Ethics: Normative Ethical Theories Reading: Chapter 3 (pp85-114) 2 2 Pluralistic Perspective 3 Traditional ethical theories Such theories: Offer a certain rule or principle which one can apply to any given situation – hence they are absolutist in intention. Are normative because they prescribe the morally correct way of acting. Differentiated into two groups. Consequentialist theories: Base moral judgements on the intended outcomes, aims, or goals of a certain action. If these outcomes are desirable then the action in question is morally right; if the outcomes of the action are not desirable, the action is morally wrong. The moral judgement in these is thus based on the intended outcomes, the aims, or the goals of a certain action. Therefore, they are often referred to by the term teleological (Greek word for ‘goal’). Non-consequentialist theories: Base moral judgement on the underlying principles of the decision-makers motivation. An action is right or wrong, not because we like the consequences they produce but because the underlying principles are morally right. Such theories start from the individual’s duties or rights. Also called deontological (Greek word for ‘duty’) because they look at the desirability of the principles, and based on these principles, deduce a ‘duty’ to act in a given situation, regardless of the desirability of the consequences. 4 4 Traditional Ethical Theory Frameworks Teleological framework Ethical egoism (Plato, Ayn Rand, Thomas Hobbes) Utilitarianism (Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill) Deontological framework Ethics of Duties (Immanuel Kant) Ethics of Rights and Justice (J Locke and J Rawls) 5 5 Traditional ethical theories Generally offer a certain rule or principle which one can apply to any given situation. Two differentiated groups: Motivation /Principles Action Outcomes Deontology Non-consequentialist ethics Ethics of duties Ethics of rights and justice Teleology Consequentialist ethics Ethical egoism Utilitarianism 6 6 Major normative theories in business ethics EgoismUtilitarianismEthics of DutiesRights and Justice ContributorsAdam SmithJeremy Bentham, John Stuart MillImmanuel KantJohn Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau John Rawls FocusIndividual desires or interestsOutcomes and collective welfareDutiesRights and the nature of justice RulesMaximisation of desires/self-interestAct / Rule utilitarianism Respect for autonomy and rational reason (in the form of the Categorical Imperative)Universalisable rules for the nature of justice, Respect for human beings Concept of human beingsHumans are objectively obliged to serve their self interest aloneHumans are motivated by avoidance of pain and gain of pleasure (‘hedonist)Humans are rational moral actors with free willHumans are beings that are distinguished by dignity TypeConsequentialist Outcome basedConsequentialist Outcome-basedNon-consequentialist principle-basedNon-consequentialist principle-based 7 7 8 8 Consequentialist theories (1): Ethical Egoism If we apply the theory of egoism to the case in Ethical Dilemma 3, we would have to look at the actors involved and analyze whether they freely pursue their own desires or interests in engaging in the deal. This certainly applies to the manager and his Thai partner, and by the looks of the case, it could also apply to the parents of the family business. As for the children, it could be that they are quite happy to help the parents and just take it for granted that things work like this in their world. From this perspective, an egoistic look at the situation might consider the deal as morally acceptable. One might, however, wonder if it is in the children’s long-term interest to engage in this type of work: although one could argue that it prevents them from being forced into far less desirable forms of work, moral concerns arise when considering that this type of work prevents them from gaining a decent education, enjoying time for play, and exposes them to fairly long working hours, all of which casts some doubt on whether they really are able to freely pursue their own interests. The latter considerations then would tend to suggest that from an egoistic point of view this action might be immoral. 9 9 Consequentialist theories (2): Utilitarianism 10 Refer to ethical dilemma 3 (p. 94) 10 Consequentialist theories (2): Utilitarianism Our utilitarian analysis of Ethical Dilemma 3 used the principle of act utilitarianism by asking whether in that single situation the collective pleasure exceeded the pain inflicted. Given the specific circumstances of the case, we might conclude that it is morally right, because the children’s pain is considerably small, given the fact that they might have to work anyway or that school education might not be available to them. From the perspective of rule utilitarianism one would have to ask whether child labour in principle produces more pleasure than pain. Here, our judgement might look considerably different, since it is not difficult to argue that the pains of child labour outweigh the economic benefits of it. Rule utilitarianism then does not require us to examine right or wrong in every single situation, but offers the possibility of establishing certain principles that we can apply to all such situations. 11 11 Applying the formula of universal law If we apply Kant’s moral ‘test’ to Ethical Dilemma 3, we get the following insights: According to the principle of consistency, the first question would be to ask if we would want everybody to act according to the principles of our action in all circumstances. Obviously, as the product manager you are already uncomfortable about applying the principle of exploiting child labour from a third-world context to your own family back home in Europe. You probably would not like this to become a law that is consistently applied, which would then suggest that this activity could be deemed immoral on the basis of inconsistency. Regarding the principle of human dignity, it is questionable whether the children have freely and autonomously decided to work. By making use of their labour, you could be said to be largely treating them as cheap labour for your own ends rather than as ‘ends in themselves’, suggesting that their basic human dignity was not being fully recognized and respected. Looking at the principle of universality, there is also the question of whether you would expect your friends and family to apply the same rule. In other words, it would seem rather doubtful that all other rational human beings would come to the same conclusion that child labour is a principle that should be followed on a general basis. 12 Applying Ethics of rights The perspective of human rights certainly provides the most straightforward answer to Ethical Dilemma 3. In using child labour, the product manager could be said to violate the rights of the children to education, and arguably to infringe the right to freedom of consent. Furthermore, a human rights perspective would cast doubt on the issue of an individual’s right to a living wage, as it would appear that poor wages could have necessitated the engagement of the entire family in employment over long hours of work rather than paying one parent a suitable wage to provide for his or her family. 13 13 Applying Rawls’s theory of justice Rawls’ theory and its two basic principles can be usefully applied to various business situations in order to determine ‘just’ treatment of stakeholders. If we look to Ethical Dilemma 3: The first test would be to employ the first principle and ask if all people involved (including the product manager) were in possession of the same basic liberty. Apart from the cultural differences between Europe and Thailand, this is certainly not the case for the children, since they are obviously not allowed to have even a basic education. The second principle could conceivably allow for a more tolerant approach to child labour: The first criterion for inequality would be to ask if the children are better or worse off with the arrangement. One might reasonably argue here that children are often forced into worse things in developing countries than assembling plastic toys. Prostitution, begging, and theft might be other alternatives, suggesting that the children would be better off if you concluded the deal. However, if concluding your deal meant that the children would miss schooling that they otherwise would have had, the arrangement is definitely not benefiting the least well off. The second criterion, though, poses even more of a problem, since without access to education the children do not have a realistic chance of achieving the position that the better-off parties, such as you, have. Hence, they are definitely not ‘under conditions of fair equality of opportunity’, i.e., not under the second principle. 14 14 Limits of traditional ethical theories Too abstract. Stark (1994) suggests that traditional ethical theories are too theoretical and impractical for the concrete day-to-day concerns of managers. In real life, managers are unlikely to apply abstract principles derived from dead philosophers when dealing with the concrete problems of business. The business context has its own values, structures and practices that need to be taken into account. Too reductionist. Kaler (1999) argues that each theory tends to focus on one aspect of morality at the cost of all the rest of morality. Why choose consequences, duties, or rights when all are important? Too objectivist and elitist. Parker (1998) suggests that ethical theories attempt to occupy a moral high ground, such that those well versed in the ethical philosophers and who know and understand their theories can pronounce on the right and wrong of other people without any subjective experience of the situation they are faced with. Just because Adoni knows the difference between utilitarianism and the ethics of duty why should that mean that he can decide for you whether a product manager in a corporation is doing the right thing? 15 15 Limits of traditional (normative) theories Too impersonal. By focusing on abstract principles, traditional ethical theories do not take account of the personal bonds and cultural relationships that shape our thoughts and feelings about right and wrong. Too rational and codified. Ethical theories try and distil right and wrong down to codified rational rules of behaviour. Bauman (1993) contends that this suppresses our moral autonomy and denigrates the importance of our moral feelings and emotions, all of which he claims are crucial for acting morally towards others. Too imperialist. Why assume that ethical theories from the West are suitable for business people everywhere else in the world? What about the ethical teachings of classical Asian or traditional African philosophy, for instance—do these not also have something useful to say about modern-day business ethics? 16 16 Limits of traditional (normative) theories Such problems with traditional theories stem from their emphasis on the absolutist approach to ethical theory. As a result, there have been a number of more recent attempts to redevelop ethical theories that – following a relativistic approach – emphasize greater flexibility, and include consideration of decision-makers (managers), their context (business), and their relations with others as opposed to just abstract principles. We shall consider them now in application to ethical dilemma 3. 17 17 Contemporary ethical theories Virtue ethics – Ethical approaches based on character and Integrity Feminist ethics – Ethical approaches based on relationships and responsibility Discourse ethics – Ethical approaches based on procedures of norm generation Postmodern ethics – Ethical approaches based on empathy and moral impulse Reading: Chapter 3 of the core textbook (pp114-125) 18 18 Applying virtue ethics From this point of view, the virtuous product manager in Ethical Dilemma 3 could take in different perspectives depending on the community from which the notion of a virtuous manager was derived. On the one hand, you could be compassionate and considerate with the situation of the suppliers. Taking into account their need for work and money, as well as the children’s need for education, perhaps you would try to do business with them while, at the same time, assuming responsibility for the children’s education. For instance, you could support a local school, or pay sufficiently high wages to allow the family to send their children to school, rather than making use of them as cheap labour. On the other hand, you might also think that the ‘good life’ in rural Thailand might in fact consist of an entire family working happily together and that Western concepts of education, professionalization, and efficiency are a different concept of a ‘good life’ that might not be appropriate to the Thai approach to life. Virtue ethics in a business context such as this would typically suggest that the solution to many of the problems faced by managers are located in the culture and tradition of the relevant community of practice. The product manager should determine what a ‘virtuous’ product manager would do from their professional code of conduct, from virtuous role models, or from professional training. 19 19 Applying feminist ethics Applying a relationships approach to the case in Ethical Dilemma 3 would require far more knowledge about the case than we can acquire from just reading about it. A relationships-oriented perspective would cause the product manager to try to get a closer view of the family involved and see if the children are really happy in this situation. It would also involve a better understanding of the social and economic constraints that cause the family to embark on this particular production pattern. A feminist perspective would not necessarily argue categorically against any involvement of children in the process, as long as the inter-familiar relationships are functioning well and the children are not forced, exploited, or compelled to work beyond their physical capacities. As the latter conditions might not be fulfilled, relational approaches would tend to object to child labour as well—however, not because it violates certain (Western) principles, but because of the likely distress and suffering of the children. Furthermore, feminist theories would also look at the situation of the other actors involved and scrutinize, for example, the question of how the money earned by the assembling of toys is spent and how