Ethics and Law in Business and Society - Essay Example

Ethics and Law in Business and Society On moral development Moral development has remained a central topic in both educational and psychological discourses and some of the theories are attributed to the work of Lawrence Kohlberg. Kohlberg studied the area of moral development based on the principles and ideals proposed by Jean Piaget and developed six stages of development in human beings. This borrows heavily from the initial double development stages that Piaget developed initially; highlighting that moral development being continuous expands beyond the lifespan of a human being. Under stage one, Kohlberg described the development of obedience and punishment, a stage that is more dominant in growing children with some adults suffering from the same kind of reasoning as a result of lack of early development influences. Within this stage, children rue all rules as they are viewed as a fixed and absolute from of leadership created to eat into their space and liberties thus denying them the chance to develop. The second stage of development according to Kohlberg is the individualism and exchange stage in which the views developed by children towards different actions and words as based on the level of service to their own points of view. Based on Heinz dilemma, a course of action that would be favored by children must serve their best interest for it to be considered the best course of action. Under the conventionality level, the third stage of moral development according to Kohlberg is interpersonal relationships in which stage members are obliged to live up to the societal expectation thus creating the ‘good-girl, good-boy’ effect. Though it does not necessarily mean being nice, the members feel obliged to develop conformity towards behaving well. The fourth stage of moral development seeks to establish the desire to maintain the social order. The behavior of people within this stage of development becomes multispectral and involves all aspects of the society. As a result, people at this stage become increasingly aware of the need to maintain law and order and accomplishing the moral duties of each and every person while respecting authority. Under the post conventional stage, the fifth stage of social contract and individual rights is attained and people develop more interest in following values, respecting opinions and becoming more trusting of others. This follows the rules and laws of the society and thus creates an orderly society in which respect for the law is paramount. Finally, the universal principles of moral development are the final stage under level three according to Kohlberg. Under this level, people begin to conform to the universal ethical behaviors and reason based on the nature of the problem. Based on Kohlberg theories of moral development, the behavior of human beings is guided by their personal experiences and believes. Organizations can employ the six levels of moral development to enhance integrity and ethical values within its operation through interaction with different people with different views. However, Kohlberg theory has been disputed due to the belief that moral reasoning has no direct relationship with moral behavior. In most cases, what we tend to think or believe should be done which is the main elements of Kohlberg theory is different from what we actually do. This makes the theory impractical and less applicable to the development of ethical behaviors and personality within organizations and the elimination of non-ethical behaviors. On justice Over the last 2,500 years, moral philosophy and ethics have been developed and this has formed part of the doing the right thing concept. A number of principles have been developed by different philosophers on how we can work towards being morally upright and developing concepts which are generally accepted by all members of the society irrespective of their influence and wealth. The philosophers approach to ethics has a primary fundamental role in defining what is right and wrong before the eyes of the society. In the eyes of Emanuel Kant, doing right involves following a number of principles without infringing on the rights of other people at the same time. As a result, Kant describes the righteous laws as being the basis of the rights of each and every individual within the society. As a result, no action can be deemed right if it infringes on the liberty of others by dictating how they behave in an open society. Each action should be guided by the principle of equality before the society to eliminate actions which may impose the views of a given group on the other. Aristotle concentrates on the development of an individual’s character in the process of doing well and adopting good behaviors. However, Aristotle believes the doing good cannot be an instant process and must thus be practiced and developed mutually as behavior in people. To him, doing well begins as a virtuous act that enters into a vicious cycle and graduates into a habit that cannot be eliminated easily from the people. Virtue remains a vital disposition in the process of developing a society driven by the desire to do good to other people and is thus a mean to the rule. It is the basis upon which every wise man’s action will be weighed and the level of just and righteousness determined. In the eyes of John Rawls, doing right must be pegged to justice and each party must feel equally treated and respected as a result of any endeavor to do the right thing. John Stuart Mills’s argument on actions that are right captures the best illustration of ethics that can be applied in all aspects of life in modern perspective. The action achieved at the end of the action should not just be felt by the performer but to all who are affected by the same. This philosophy has been applied to different levels and spheres of life in judging actions and behaviors of different people due to its universality and brevity. Other theories have concentrated on the motives and used it to determine whether an action can be considered just, a fact that has failed to evaluate the positive results of such actions. Utilitarianism theory is based on the basis that the practice or action can only be judged based on the consequences of the action and how it affects the majority of the people in the business and out of the business. The action will thus be considered ethically correct if only it produces positive results as compared to the negative results posted. This school of thought was first presented by philosopher John Stuart Mills who argued that a wrong or right action is only visible through the results. An ethical action should thus create the greatest usefulness to the business and the people within the business. Ethical leadership has been extensively used for evaluating the ethical position of the company and its leadership ability to manage the business. The performance of the business is thus influenced by the traits of the leaders such as honest, caring, fair and responsible. Leadership involves the ability of the organization top brass to do the rights things that aim at fulfilling the objective of the organization while meeting the needs of the employees and the customers. Management involves the ability of the organization to do the right thing; a process that may go beyond the ethical roles of leadership and adopt the end justifies the means mentality. Therefore, the success of any organizational management process must seek to blend leadership with management to ensure that it succeeds and achieves the overall objectives. Ethical leaders have high dignity and are respectful of other employees in the organization irrespective of their position in the organization. As a leader that respects the position and roles of other employees, ethical individuals do not use others to achieve their personal goals. This is due to the strong values and standards that such a leader accords his colleagues at all times. Leadership is essential in the effective management an organization and the ability to manage defines a leader. Leadership and management have distinct roles and position in the success of an organization but are joined at the hip. All leaders are not effective managers and all managers cannot make the best leaders but the leadership without management produces no results and management without leadership also creates room for anarchy. The altruism philosophy advocates for doing good instead of feeling good as the integral component of doing right, a position that has attracted varied arguments. Doing well is a response of first feeling good as an individual bagged with inner emotional torture and regrets have no moral motivation to do any good. As a result, feeling good does not come after doing good momentarily but the two have a vicious relationship in which doing one results to the other. This school of thought was first presented by philosopher John Stuart Mills who argued that a wrong or right action is only visible through the results. It is the basis upon which every wise man’s action will be weighed and the level of just and righteousness determined. In the eyes of John Rawls, doing right must be pegged to justice and each party must feel equally treated and respected as a result of any endeavor to do the right thing. An ethical action should thus create the greatest usefulness to the business and the people within the business. Ethical leadership has been extensively used for evaluating the ethical position of the company and its leadership ability to manage the business. The performance of the business is thus influenced by the traits of the leaders such as honest, caring, fair and responsible. Leadership involves the ability of the organization top brass to do the rights things that aim at fulfilling the objective of the organization while meeting the needs of the employees and the customers. Doing well in essence products a great feeling in people due to the self-satisfaction and gratification that it creates. On the other side of the coin, feeling good motivates the desire to continue doing the right thing which increases the good meted to other people as a direct impact of the feel good motivation. On corporate responsibility Milton Friedman has contributed in the development of corporation responsibilities and how such roles influences and shapes the society. In one of his publications in the New York Times, Friedman penned down one of the most controversial piece on corporate responsibility that has today been discussed under Friedman discourse on corporation responsibility. According to Friedman, businesses are driven by the sole responsibility of generating profits to please and address the interests of shareholders. However, Friedman argued that it was incumbent upon companies to develop the right and responsible attitudes to eliminate the challenges of more binding constraints which will lead to loss of competitive edge. Based on Friedman’s position, different companies across the globe has considered corporate social responsibility as a distraction from their main agenda and role which is the need to act in a manner that reflect the best interest of the shareholders. As a result, companies that dismiss the pressures associated with corporate social responsibility eliminate the need for its executive to take days off their precious time to address the position it holds to the society. Instead, organizations will work towards achieving their main role and working towards enhancing profitability through working on the interests of the shareholders. Friedman arguments were based on the assumption that business should be engaged in activities that purely seek to increase their private goals and gains without having any significant and binding social role. Returns of capital does not also have a level beyond which it is considered unjust, arguments that have been considered to border on the principles of individualism, usury and greed. Archie Carroll on the other hand developed a four dimensional approach to business responsibility which adds on the social responsibility as argued by Friedman which concentrated on the need to increase the base of profits. According to Carroll, corporate responsibility should be based on four principles which include the economic, legal, ethical and discretionary roles of the companies. Under economic functions, companies are driven by the need to maximize their value through an improvement in the profits and meeting the expectations of the shareholders. This is similar to the overall argument fronted by Friedman in his article that, however, borders on capitalism and encourages recklessness without concern for the society. Legal responsibilities according to Carroll exist for businesses and this cannot be avoided as they are defined by the laws of the country. the discretional roles as defined by Carroll is the main tenet behind the corporate social responsibility as we know it today as companies are not compelled by any law to participate but pushed by the social forces to be part of the development of the society. Friedman and Carroll agree on the need by firms to maximize their profits in order to please the shareholders and both advocate that any activities that organizations engage in should be guided by the legal standards. However, Carroll’s angle of argument goes beyond the need of organizations to meet the desires of the shareholders through maximization of profits to include the ethical and discretionary responsibilities of all organizations. To remain good corporate citizens, corporation must conform to five characteristics that are based on their social roles and responsibility to the country in which they operate. Good corporate citizens must remain responsible to the environment in which they operate and thus work towards its protection despite the need to increase its profits. Success in the same environment is influenced by the ability of the government to enhance it and develop the social amenities that increase room for investment. Good corporate citizens must pay its taxes in time to enable the government play its role of providing services to the members of the public and the corporate citizens. The development of the same environment is also influenced by the level of engagement of the citizens in constructive job and commitments. As a result, it is the role of a corporate citizen to not only create job opportunities but to also ensure fairness in employing the private citizens of the country. On corporate governance The board of directors is an integral organ in the management of any organization across the globe and this explains the rigors associated with the recruitment of the same. Board of directors have responsibilities that are developed by the organization which may vary from one institution to the other but are all categorized under the strategic role, leadership role among other responsibilities. Such external pressures are then addressed through the development of strategic measures that enhance the ability of the organization to perform despite their prevailing external situation. The board of directors also has a role of ensuring that the shareholder meet their end of the bargain and remain responsible to the organization and commitment to support its initiative. The board of directors also establishes the moral framework for the organization by highlighting the dos and the don’ts for all employees irrespective of their position. Strategic development and response to different market situations is also the primary role of the board of directors and this is done in collaboration with other departmental heads. The board of directors is also the main level of human resource management and participates in the process of employee appraisal and reward of performance as a way of increasing the motivation of the employees. As the mirror to the organization, the board of directs preserves the corporate image at all times by being transparent and ethical in their business and private dealings to avoid placing the business in a scenario that may affect its success and growth. Executives can learn from the roles of the board of directors and the changes that have occurred in the nature of managing big multinationals to understand their position in the future. From the primers discussed, it is evident that the role of the executive in the future will change depending on the position of the market and the performance of its people. The primers have fairly focused on the need to develop a structural approach of ensuring that employees and the people are satisfied at all times. Thus, it is the responsibility of the future executives to invest in the power of the employees and ensure that their satisfaction remain an integral goal of the organization. Management and governance have considerable differences and this is exhibited in the roles, influence and position of both management and governance in an organization. This leads to the possibility of controlling and running an organization in a logical and legal manner to eliminate the ethical situations highlighted in the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2002. Governance is not management as governance is concerned with proper operation of an organization while management involves the operation process developed. Read More