The Issue of Business Ethics - Assignment Example

? BUSINESS ETHICS AND CONSEQUENTIALISM Introduction The issue of business ethics has been a significant aspect that businesses need to look into in the current business climate. It is critical that a business should conduits all is services in a ethical manner. There is an ethical code of conduct that businesses are expected to adhere by law. Breaking any of the ethical regulations puts the business at risk of grave lawsuits which may result in major fines or even closure of the business. Even though the company may be able to get away with just a fine, unethical behavior results in other major undesirable effects on the company. For instance, it may repulse stakeholders and employees. It spoils the public image of the company which in the long run affects the company profitability (Hartman, 2002). This article analysis the ethical concerns in the case of the company that manufactured transistors that became the sole supplier to pacemaker manufacturing company in relation to Jeremy Bentham theory of ethics of utility. Ethical issues in the Case The company in question had been involved in supplying transistors used in production of pacemakers. The pacemaker is an electric device used to ensure that the heart of a patient with weak pulse rates does not stop. By implanting the devise in an individual, the heart functioning is completely dependent on this device. This means that if the device stops because of a defect, the patient automatically dies. There have been cases where patients had died after pulling the wires that connected to the device out unconsciously (Ferrell, 2010) There were also concerns on the lack of a standards used to test the electronics used in making the pace setters. The ethical issues in this case were being involved in supplying transistors to a company producing a device without good standards which put the lives of people at risk. If the faults of these devices would be traced back to the company supplying the transistors, they would be in danger of being sued in a law suit. This would have bad implications on the company which would pay huge fines on the affected families. The implication of the company in such a serious case leading to death of people would taint the company which would again have huge implications on the company’s productivity. Another ethical issue is if the company would pull out from this business, the company producing the pacemakers would also be out of business since the company in question was the only existing supplier. The pacemaker had benefited may people possibly saving their lives despite it having many flaws (Ferrell, 2010). It would be wrong the deny patients this device which might just save them from the pangs of death. The company in the end decided to continue supplying the pacemaker company but would ensure that its engineers carried out rigorous testing on the electronics. This is because this is the only way that he supplying company would be help against in case of law suit. They also stated that they would stop business with the pacemaker company if the company failed to look into the technical problems. This way, the company would be able to help in making it possible for patient to enjoy the promising technology of the pacemaker. The company also figured that although it was not getting a lot of profits from this venture at that time. This was an upcoming industry with promising future growth and the company would get major benefits in the long run. What would Jeremy Bentham, the father of utilitarianism, have said about this Case? Bentham believed that utilitarianism is guided by two masters: pain and pleasure. Making ethical decisions is therefore based on looking for happiness and avoiding pain. This therefore means that utilitarian ethics means making decision that ensures that an individual benefits the most (Jeremy, 2009). Although it is right to promote the well being of others, this cannot be done if it is in conflict with individual good. In the case of the sole supplier, Bentham would have definitely made the decision of cutting out business with the pacemaker company. The company had a lot to lose. This is because the industry was still green and death with a sensitive part of businesses creating devices which could be the cause of death of individual creating a room for lawsuits. Because of the juvenile nature of the business, there were many loopholes which put the company at this risk. After all, the company obligation is to its shareholders ensuring it makes good profits which the sales form this venture were not giving (Jeremy, 2009). In this case, Bentham opinion on making decision based on pain or pleasure would not be right looking at how the pacemaker industry has developed to be today. Sometimes, individual and even organization make decisions which are for the overall good of humanity. If the company which was the then sole supplier of the pacemaker industry had stopped supplying the pacemaker company, then we would not have the current sophisticated technology which has saved many people’s lives. Application of Utility Test on this Case In this case, there are two possible solutions to the ethical problem at question. One is to continue with supplying the pacemaker country. The costs of these are unknown but could be huge in case the company gets several suits which may lead it out of business. The costs could also be low if the company ensures that it delivers standard electronics and can thus not be implied in case of defects. This burden would be carried by the pacemaker company (Hartman, 2002). The other alternative is stopping the supply losing with cost of losing current gains on sales and future sales which could be high since the industry had prospects of future growth. In this case, the decision to continue supplying the pacemaker company is the best alternative since it makes a larger percentage of people happy. The patients benefiting from the devices would be happy, the pacemakers company would also be happy and some of the stakeholders who think that this action is good for the wellbeing of people would also be happy. Only a small portion of the owners of the company who think that this decision puts the company at risk would be unhappy (Bowie & Schneider, 2011). The other alternative would only make a small portion of people happy. It also has lower costs and has the best overall long-terms benefits. This can be applied successfully in future situation that concerns an upcoming promising business venture. Common Good Test In this case, the parts of the common good include being involved in production of a device which has helped many people survive and regain health. However, the company is also concerned that this production which does not have established good production standards could put the life of the individuals using the device in danger and thereby put the company at risk of law suits. If the company stops the supply the production is stopped altogether nobody benefits or dies form defective devices (Ferrell, 2010). The pacemaker company is closed down and that becomes the end of development of the pacemaker device. However, if the company continues to supply the pacemaker the electronics needed, it can push for development of acceptable standards giving room for improvement of these devices through eradication of possible flaws (Hartman, 2002). This would make it possible for the pacemaker company to develop the most appropriate device thereby saving other people’s lives. The second alternative thereby serves the common good of everyone. Comparing the two tests, the utility test and the common good test, one can observe the utility test is more informative and involves more steps meaning that it leads to a more informed decision which should be the most appropriate one. In the utility test, one not only considers the benefits, but also the costs involved. In conclusion, making ethical decisions is a complicated process because sometimes, there are no definite right and wrong alternatives. This is because all alternatives have some costs and benefits accrued to them but the amounts of these two variables differ. In making these decisions, it is good to examine the implications of these decisions, both good and bad and pick the option which has the most benefits and lowest liabilities. The view of avoiding pain and seeking pleasure may not always apply since the alternatives may have some pain and some pleasure. References Bowie, N. E., & Schneider, M. (2011). Business ethics for dummies. Hoboken: John Wiley. Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2010). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases : 2009 update. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning. Hartman, L. P. (2002). Perspectives in business ethics. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Jeremy, B. (2009). Utilitarianism. S.l.: Bibliobazaar, Llc. Read More