Business Ethics and Decision Making - Assignment Example

Final Exam, Ethics, Decision Making, and Communication In the business world, is it ethical to use any means to make a sale, ensure success, take advantage of a customer, or beat a competitor to a sale? Discuss. It is not ethical to use any means to make a sale, ensure success, take advantage of a customer, or beat a competitor, if they can lead to financial loss for the business in the long run and result to actions that cannot be universalized. Milton Friedman believes that the main duty of a company is to maximize profits for shareholders (Cutler and Nye 27). On the one hand, making a sale immediately increases profits. On the other hand, if the means to making a sale at any means include fraud, such as selling fake goods, which is illegal and can lead to the closure of the company, then such means is a disservice to shareholders and is not ethical (Cutler and Nye 27). Furthermore, taking advantage of a customer may be unethical, if it means exploiting the reality that he does not know that the product sold to him has some major weaknesses. This is not illegal and is not entirely unethical, if the product is in good working condition. However, this becomes unethical if the action has underlying immoral motives. For instance, the seller wants to sell a defective cell phone to his customer. This act cannot be universalized (Shaw 62) because no one would then trust sellers if this happens everywhere. Hence, it is not always ethical to do business transactions that can lead to long-term loss of sales and involve actions that cannot be universalized 2. Review the four contrasting ideas about rights theory and explain why you think that good consequences may not flow from high respect for rights. Good consequences might not always follow from high respect for rights because this can lead to adverse results or moral confusion too. First, rights cannot determine a “precise ethical criteria” (de Mori). Rights theory lacks logical coherence that is essential to a theoretical ethical perspective. Second, high respect for rights is not always useful in resolving moral conflicts (de Mori). An example is a native clan who think that they have a right to maintain their tribal lands for hunting purposes, while the local government and other citizens assert that they have a right to convert said lands into commercial buildings that can increase total revenues for both the government and the public. Rights theory does not provide solutions to this conflict of rights. Third, discussing rights can increase or reinforce social inequality because it can he highly individualistic (de Mori). A customer can argue that he has a right to own any and as many guns as he can afford, but the government might create a law that limits the kind and number of guns he has because unlimited gun supply can lead to probable harms to the security of others in the future (de Mori). Having high respect for individual rights may disregard collective rights in this case (de Mori). Fourth, collective goods cannot be easily integrated into rights theory because of its individualistic nature (de Mori). Human rights tend to promote autonomy and freedom from too much government control and intervention. Collective goods may not have priority in this ethical framework. For example, a consumer group argues that they have a right to ban the selling of cigarettes because its consumption has killed millions of people, while giving illness to millions more. This group asserts their right to a collective good that can clash with the right of individuals who believe that they have a right to do anything they want with their bodies. Thus, having high respect for rights may overlook collective rights and has weaknesses in offering a framework for determining ethical criteria and resolving ethical and rights conflicts. 3. What are the four components of moral behavior and how do they affect moral reasoning? The four components of moral behavior, according to Rest, are moral awareness, moral judgment, development of moral intention, and moral action (Christen et al. 124). Each component affects moral reasoning’s different processes. Moral awareness impacts moral reasoning because it makes people aware that there is a moral dilemma to be resolved and that there is a need to act morally (Christen et al. 124). An example is a sales agent who has moral awareness when he knows that his supervisor gave him defective goods to sell. Moral judgment affects moral reasoning because it determines the moral criteria to be used in solving moral issues (Christen et al. 124). The sales agent may use rights theory to determine that the action of selling defective goods is against consumer rights. Next, development of moral intention directs the motivation behind the moral reasoning (Christen et al. 124). Moral motivation is essential to being committed to a moral course of action after considering several alternatives (Christen et al. 124). The agent decides to be committed to consumer rights than the goal of making a sale. Moral action applies the chosen action of the moral judgment and intention that impacts the last stage of moral reasoning (Christen et al. 124). The agent tells the customer that they have run out of stock for the time being as his moral action. 4. Why is our future as a species dim unless we learn to change the way we conduct business? Our future as a species is dim unless we learn to change the way we conduct business because an absolutely free-market approach that has no concern for long-term consequences and different kinds of collective rights can lead to the eventual destruction of the environment, fast and vast overconsumption of limited, including non-renewable, resources, and the potential production of goods or systems that can probably wipe out the human race. The way that some people conduct business assumes that natural resources are infinite and that there is no need to slow down and think about the consequences of business processes to the environment (e.g. pollution and climate change). Lack of consideration for the consequences of our actions to future generations will lead us to exploit present resources to the demise of the latter. At the same time, the need to beat the competition or to make sales can generate goods or systems that can have negative effects on health and life. For instance, an arms company wants to create a super drug that can create super soldiers who do not get tired and are not bothered by moral dilemmas. The problem is that this drug may be a zombie virus. This may seem far-fetched but it is based on the idea that focusing on sales can lead to misjudging the consequences of our products and actions. If we do not change our priorities and continue to lose sight of our moral values, we will destroy the environment and ourselves. 5. Analyze the ten techniques that top-notch liars use to maximize their effectiveness. Do you disagree with any of these techniques? Which ones, and why? The ten techniques that top-notch liars use to maximize their effectiveness are the following, together with my analysis: (1) Expert liars do not lie always, except when they have a good reason (Wise). Pathological liars lie too much and too unnecessarily, so top-notch liars choose their battles wisely. This is an illogical logic for unethical businesspeople. Lying has long-term consequences to credibility and success, so whatever the reason, I prefer being upfront than lying; (2) Expert liars have a strong groundwork (Wise). This means that they think deeply about the logical foundation of their lies. They appear truthful because of their convincing lies; (3) Expert liars spin truths to support their lies (Wise). These liars are telling the truth to some extent, but leave misinterpretations behind to support their lies; (4) Expert liars know and respond to their target audience (Wise). They know how to practice market segmentation by knowing their target’s needs, goals, strengths, and weaknesses; (5) Expert liars are consistent in their lies (Wise). They apply coherence to their criteria of lying; (6) Expert liars are committed to their lies and to lying (Wise). They enjoy lying and find it normal and even morally acceptable; (7) Expert liars control nonverbal cues to project sincerity while lying (Wise). This is deception in multiple layers; (8) Expert liars are expert emotional manipulators (Wise). They use every means they can to distract people from finding out their lies; (9) Expert liars know how to counterattack (Wise). They can do rebounds through aggression or diversionary tactics; (10) Expert liars bargain by decreasing responsibility for their lies (Wise). These are people who blame others or the situation when they are caught lying. I disagree with spinning truths, knowing their target audience, and bargaining the most. Spinning the truth confuses people and can even result to laying the blame to others. Knowing the target audience is very deceptive because it exploits people’s weaknesses and anxieties. Bargaining is all about losing self-responsibility. This technique erases the role of responsibility and accountability in lying. 6. What is the best way for organizational leaders to create an ethical environment? The best way for organizational leaders to create an ethical environment is to design, implement, and constantly evaluate and improve organizational systems, policies, and standards that support ethical behavior and to have zero-tolerance for ethical violations (Daft 172). This starts with leaders expressing and embodying high ethical principles at the workplace and their personal lives (Daft 172). The next step is ensuring that the organization is designed to have a culture that promotes ethical behaviors, and if not, have mechanisms in place to change it (Daft 173). By culture, I refer to having norms, values, beliefs, attitudes, and practices that are ethical and are the way of life in the company. For example, employees are aware of thinking and acting ethically in everything they do in line with their jobs because it is how they work. Moreover, the workplace environment must reward ethical behaviors and punish unethical ones. An example is providing monetary and non-monetary rewards for people who report or correct wrongdoing and punishing wrongdoers with penalties and sanctions that are apt to the kind and level of their unethical actions. 7. What is your thought process like for thinking through a situation to decide whether it is ethical or unethical? My thought process is a mixture of Kant and Friedman ethics. I believe that I can do what is good without harming the company’s bottom-line. My thought process starts with the determination of the ethical dilemma. First, I ask myself if I am involved in an ethical problem, and if yes, what ethical principles and values are at stake. This is what Rest calls as moral awareness (Christen et al. 124). Next, I think about the options I can take that support my personal and my organization’s code of conduct. I weigh them according to their effects and particularly consider if these actions can be universalized. Moreover, I do not treat people as means to my selfish ends, and I also consider if my actions can contribute to the long-term welfare of my organization. These actions engage moral judgment (Christen et al. 124). Finally, I choose the option that upholds my organization’s code of conduct and my personal values the most and direct my action and commitment towards it (Christen et al. 124). These acts support moral intention and moral action (Christen et al. 124). 8. What do you think are the crucial capabilities of moral leadership? The crucial capabilities of moral leadership are principled problem-solving, analytical thinking, and critical thinking skills (Daft 175). The first capability is principled problem-solving which means being able to solve problems using appropriate ethical principles (Daft 175). Being principled also means that leaders have internalized these principles enough to know how to apply them, even when others are not looking (Daft 175). An example is a CEO who thinks that he should apply the least harm to stakeholders when making decisions, which includes not approving a project that pollutes the water system of the community. The second capability is analytical thinking. Moral leaders should be able to break apart an ethical issue and fully analyze its parts (Daft 175). The said CEO analyzed that the project has high short-term revenues, but will incur loss in the future, when people have discovered that their waters are polluted and decide to sue the company. The third capability is critical thinking. Ethics can have many gray areas where laws cannot be clearly applied (Daft 175). Moral leaders should be able to critically think about their ethical situation and consider the depth and extent of their ethical dilemmas and implications. They can criticize different options and apply the best solution to their ethical problems. The CEO considered not doing the project because it is against his ethical principles and the long-term benefit of the company. 9. Explain how suspending normal ethics does not mean you overlook rules of conduct. Suspending normal ethics does not mean that I have to overlook the rules of conduct because I must continue following the latter. For instance, I will suspend the normal ethics of considering the benefits of my actions to the most people, as part of utilitarianism, but I must still follow the rule of conduct of avoiding doing harm on any stakeholder. A specific conduct would be, as a QA employee, I should check the quality of fresh produce being delivered to supermarkets. Even if I do not actively think about the most happiness for the most people, I can and must still follow the rule of conduct from the management to avoid harming people and losing my job. I believe this decision depends on the ethical foundations of the rules of conduct. If these rules are based on ethical principles, then they are likely to promote ethical behaviors too. I can suspend normal ethics then, but not the rules of conduct. 10. Provide definitions for “moral sensitivity,” “moral judgment,” “moral motivation,” and “moral virtues.” “Moral sensitivity” refers to being able to interpret the situation, to be aware of important moral elements and implications, to understand how different potential actions could impact concerned parties, to show empathy, and to know one’s own intuition and emotional reactions (Walker 52). Moral sensitivity combines empathy for one’s reason and emotions and those of other stakeholders. “Moral judgment” requires deliberating different considerations that are important to diverse courses of action and making a judgment about which of the existing actions would be the most morally justifiable (Walker 52). A moral judgment is the process of thinking about the resolution to moral dilemmas. “Moral motivation” means being able to give higher importance to moral values over other conflicting concerns (Walker 52). A morally motivated leader knows that his/her moral principles are more important than financial gains, for instance. Aristotle defined moral virtue as the practice of choosing the mean of excess and deficiency of virtues through reason (Walker 52). It is about selecting the middle ground, such as choosing between bankruptcy and exorbitant profits. 11. Describe what you would consider the most likely social responsibility initiatives and strategies. I believe that the most likely social responsibility initiatives involve workplace diversity and community engagement because they are traditional initiatives and do not cost too much for companies, or because they are already in compliance with existing laws (Okpara and Idowu 211). For instance, the initiative of workplace diversity is important in expanding the workforce and follows equal employment opportunity laws. Community engagement is nothing new, as it concerns providing monetary or material support to community projects and activities. As for social responsibility strategies, I believe that the most common are aligning these strategies with company strategies and reporting about initiatives for enhancing company image and morale to shareholders and the public (Okpara and Idowu 211). Some companies already find it important to align social responsibility strategies and corporate strategies to maximize social responsibility’s benefits. Other companies report these initiatives in their annual reports or a separate social responsibility report to attain competitive advantage that can raise company image and employee morale. 12. How have you developed the courage to withstand pressures that challenge your commitment to act ethically? I have developed the courage to withstand pressures that challenge my commitment to act ethically by having a sound moral framework that I follow when engaged in moral dilemmas. Moral sensitivity plays a great deal in my life, because I have honed my empathy and critical thinking skills to know how to place myself in the position of others and how to criticize different actions in consideration to human rights and moral virtues (Walker 52). Moral sensitivity is like a moral radar, wherein even if something in the workplace seems “normal,” uncertain feelings about it pricks my moral sensitivity and encourages me to undergo moral reasoning and analysis. Moral sensitivity is followed with moral judgment where I follow moral motivation in choosing moral actions (Walker 52). The courage comes from the habit of doing what is right through knowing what is right and constantly doing what is right even when no one is looking. 13. How is it possible to live a faith-based life in all activities, personally and professionally, to “work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord? It is possible to live a faith-based life in all activities, personally and professionally, as if working whole-heartedly for the Lord by never compromising my ethical principles and moral virtues. I have strong moral motivation that is based on the commandments of God, where I want my actions and thoughts to please Him, and to do what my conscience believes is right. My conscience follows a moral framework that has spiritual foundations. I believe this mindset cannot be compromised because doing so will destroy my identity. I am open to sacrifices of my welfare, however, if it means attaining win-win solutions. An example is leaving my job after whistleblowing, even if I have built a strong career in my company already. In essence, it is possible to live in and with faith through practicing integrity, where the deep wholeness of my different faculties exists alongside honesty in my dealings with others. Moral motivation and moral sensitivity are crucial to my moral courage. Works Cited Christen, Markus, van Schaik, Carel, Fischer, Johannes, Huppenbauer, Markus, and Carmen Tanner. Empirically Informed Ethics: Morality between Facts and Norms. New York: Springer, 2014. Print. Cutler, Tony, and David Nye. “The Law Relating to Whistleblowing.” Whistleblowing at Work. Ed. David Lewis. New Jersey: Atlanta P. 25-38. Print. Daft, Richard. The Leadership Experience. 6th ed. Connecticut: Cengage, 2015. Print. De Mori, Barbara. “In Defense of Moral Rights.” Web. 17 Feb. 2015. Okpara, John, and Samuel O. Idowu. Corporate Social Responsibility: Challenges, Opportunities and Strategies for 21st Century Leaders. New York: Springer, 2013. Print. Shaw, William. Business Ethics: A Textbook with Cases. 7th ed. Massachusetts: Wadsworth. Print. Walker, Lawrence. “Kohlberg and the Structural-Development Approach to Moral Psychology.” The Variables of Moral Capacity. Eds. David C. Thomasma and David N. Weisstub. Netherlands: Kluwer. 43-56. Print. Wise, Jeff. “Top Ten Secrets of Effective Liars.” Psychology Today, 3 May 2010. Web. 17 Feb. 2015. Read More