Business Ethics and Sustainability: Reflective Journals and Readings - Assignment Example

Reflective Journals on Week 1, 2, 5, and 6 Readings Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Week 1 Readings 2 Week 2 Readings 4 Week 5 Readings 6 Week 6 Readings 9 Week 10: Overview of the Readings and Reflections 11 References 13 Week 1 Readings Week 1’s reading on the topic of sustainability served to expand my knowledge on the sustainability concept, which has become ubiquitous in successful business practice. From the reading, ‘the sustainability phenomenon’ by Campbell and Mollica (2009), I have learnt crucial lessons regarding the different ways the concept of sustainability can be applied not only in the business realm but also by government agencies. One of the unique lessons gained from the Week 1 reading revolves around the realization that actions or activities considered by one firm to be sustainable can be termed as unsustainable in other firms or agencies. This particular lesson is supported by the example provided of a company involved in clearing forests for timber, which considers itself sustainable by offering employment opportunities to the local people, and digging wells and funding schools. On the contrary, the company’s operations or activities are environmentally unsustainable due to the long-term effect of clearing forests. In order to reduce the ambiguity in the application of sustainability principles, firms must try to balance the different perspectives of sustainability considering economic, social, political, and environmental aspects (D’Amato, Henderson &Florence, 2009). Sustainability has been interpreted as a way of reducing inequities in global economic distribution and safeguarding the interests of future generations and the existing species from extinction. From the reading of Week 1 on the sustainability phenomenon, I have deduced that the great limitations undermining the effective application of the sustainability concept emanate from its contemporary definition. The definition of sustainability as applied today fails to capture the limits on what sort of actions or activities may be universally regarded as sustainable (Kates, Parris & Leiserowitz, 2005). This particular information from the reading serves to shed more light on my understanding of why applications of the principles of sustainability remain a great dilemma for organizational leaders or managements. According to Buselich (2002), current problems arising from the application of the sustainability concept can be attributed to failures in sustainability assessments, which fail to address the interrelations and interdependencies of economic, environmental, and social factors to establish sufficient vision before venturing into an activity. Despite the importance of sustainability, I have established that its application has been criticized from different perspectives where it threatens other important principles in the business environment such as social responsibility. From the reading, I learnt that the sustainability principle has been criticized in circumstances where it has been thought to be applied with intention of absconding social responsibility in corporate operations. The preference for sustainability as opposed to corporate responsibility is associated with elimination of the term responsibility, which compels corporations to dedicate significant returns to support the welfare of the society. I have been able to understand the drive behind the increased embracement of the concept of sustainable development, which is depicted in this reading as a new way of circumventing the inherent conflict between corporation’s profitability and social responsibility. In conclusion, the Week 1 reading has enhanced my conceptualization of the sustainability discourse, which appears to be “blameless” strategy that should be adopted in the corporate world amidst the increased concerns on the sustainability of natural resources. I now have a broad view of the concept that may assist me to understand why some organizations do not implement certain decisions seen by other firms as sustainable. Week 2 Readings Week 2 reading played tremendously enhanced my understanding of how the normative ethical theories influence the process of making good decisions. Information from the chapter on normative theories of ethics serves to expound on the knowledge obtained from the previous chapter that explored the purposes of understanding ethics. The chapter about normative ethical theories has enhanced my knowledge on the different approaches to morality often adopted in resolving ethical dilemmas. However, the readings have not resolved my greatest dilemma on how to determine whether something is right or wrong. I have been able to appreciate that conflicting individual interests, and conflict between the interest of an individual and those of the society are common issues in the community that require ethics to resolve differences arising from them. I have been able to understand ethical theories as tools of answering the questions about how people ought to live or interact with one another bur not necessarily guidelines to a perfect life. An act may be termed as ethically right on a given situation but be interpreted as ethically wrong in a different situation depending on the context. Normative ethical theories generally emphasize on what majority of the members of the society believe to be norm. It is evident that ethical theories can be classified in terms of those concerned with the outcomes or consequences; and those concerned with rules or principles guiding the decision making process and ethical dilemma resolution. Since different ethical theories raise different considerations in their applications, the choice of theory highly depends on the situation or the context. Under circumstances where the interest is in outcomes or consequences, the consequentiality theories emerge to be most applicable. The consequentiality moral theories include the egoism and the utilitarianism theories, in which the latter emphasizes on the interests of others in determining whether an act is good or bad while the former dwells in self-interests (Pasternak, 2009). Application of the egoism theory faces several misconceptions including the belief that all egoists endorse hedonism in deciding what is good or wrong. The other misconception about egoism includes the belief that egoists cannot act honestly or promote other people’s interests because of the emphasis on self-interests. Nevertheless, attempts to advance individual interests may also require significant advancement of other people’s interests. Egoists may be forced to follow a rather longer route in achieving self interests, which may involve promotion of people’s interests with expectation the same will be reciprocated to them. The main reason why egoism receives little or no attention as an ethical theory in organizations results from the assertion that its basis on advancing self-interests contradicts the view of morality as the ability to restrain self-interested desires in order to live harmoniously with others. Based on the readings in Week 2, the utilitarianism theory emerges as the most appropriate ethical theory in most situations requiring evaluation of the final result or outcome. This is mainly because application of the utilitarianism theory favors an action that results in total good compared to other actions and to the majority of the people affected by the action. According to Pasternak (2009), the utilitarianism theory emerges as one of the normative social theories with capacity of dealing with practical ethical problems or dilemmas. Utilitarianism counterbalances the pains and pleasures associated with a given action to establish the action that brings about the greatest pleasure with limited pain. Notably, utilitarianism focuses on the end on the means by which the desired outcomes of action are achieved with significant focus on the benefits and harms that may result from following a given course of action (Pasternak, 2009). Although utilitarianism focuses on the welfare of the entire society or the majority, it does not endorse equal treatment of people as way of attaining the maximum positive desire of an action. The theory can be applied in different forms including act utilitarianism emphasizing on maximizing benefits for a given decision while minimizing the negative effects, and the rule utilitarianism that entails rules designed to elicit maximum benefits. However, application of the utilitarianism theory has been criticized on the ground that it is almost impossible to make decisions that favor every individual since people differ in their desires. In addition, some actions may be morally wrong despite producing positive outcomes hence the need to consider the ethical issues in both the actions and the outcomes of such actions in making ethical decisions. In conclusion, through Week 2 reading, I have learnt that there is no single normative theory that has been established as appropriate for certain situations in decision making hence the need for decision makers to evaluate the theory that emerges most appropriate for a given situation. Week 5 Readings Week 5’s reading has expanded my understanding of the concept of free markets as supported and criticized by different scholars. The chapter on business systems explores the idea of free markets and how it affected the United States’ economy during the 1980s and the 1990s. The turbulent shocks experienced in U.S upon opening up its economy to global participation can be attributed to inability of the domestic firms to compete effectively in the global markets. Adoption of the free market ideology saw foreign states dominate in the key sectors of United States such as the technology and information. Best positioned economies such as Japan emerged the greatest beneficially of this ideology as it increased its market share to about 80 percent of the global share. Through this study, I have been able to understand some of the criticism on the free market system, which I previously perceived as a win-win situation. In order to benefit from the free market system, governments must establish industrial policies with ability to strengthening domestic industrial and provision of the economic muscles required to compete in the highly dynamic global markets. Opponents of free markets have seconded the need for U.S. government to implement measures to protect emerging industries from what they term as unfair competition until they can match the global market competition. Some of the measures that can help strengthen domestic industries include establishment of financial institutions to give direct loans to specific industries especially emerging companies, restrictions on imports, and creation of agencies assist industries in strategic planning. However, the question that remains in my mind on the issue of free markets is whether World Trade Organization (WTO), the initiator of this ideology provides for measures to protect emerging companies from the unfair competition among its members. From the reading, I now understand that market forces alone cannot form the basis for making all the decisions affecting the economy hence the need for the government to cooperate with other sectors to resolve economic dilemmas. The problem of the international competitiveness and inflations that keep recurring could only be addressed through significant partnership between the government and the private sector. The initial flop of the free market ideology in U.S. reemphasizes the importance of evaluating and re-evaluating the business ideologies before implementation. From this study, it is now clear that the two competing business the individualistic and the communistic ideologies highly influence the capability of domestic industries to compete effectively in the global markets. The need to have significant partnership between the business sector and the government greatly limits the individualist ideology that takes a center stage in the American business environment. From the readings, I have discovered that communist states such as China and Japan seem to reap maximum benefits from the free markets as opposed to individualist states such a United States where the authorities take a peripheral role in the business sector. The success of Asian countries amidst the global move towards full implementation of the free markets ideology can be attributed to the readiness of the governments to restrict the freedom whenever, it emerges to favor their economic progress. In this case, I am now convinced that the concept of free market can only serve the intended purpose in the economy with significant checks whenever the necessary. As evinced from the Week 5 reading, the type of market system adopted in a given economy determines the ability of the society to resolve recurring economic problems. Therefore, the choice of either a command or a market system would greatly influence the ease with which problems in the economies are resolved. It is apparent to me that the concept of free markets is deeply rooted in the natural right of freedom as asserted by John Locke in the Week 5’s readings. The readings provide a practical application of the Utilitarianism theory covered in Week 2, where it is applied to support free markets over regulated markets. In the reading “business systems” Adam Smith argues that free markets confer greater benefits compared to regulated markets. Karl Marx, as a major critic of capitalism, supports the concept of free markets through criticizing the purported inequalities associated with free markets especially by some of the individualistic states. In conclusion, the debate on free market and regulated markets has shed more light on why adoption of a mixed market would be more appropriate in addressing economic problems faced by different states. Week 6 Readings Week 6 reading revolved around the concept sustainable development that has become the focus of the global society. The reading on the shifting paradigms for sustainable development served to build on the knowledge accrued in Week 1’s readings on sustainability. The limited advancement in the field of organizational science can be attributed to previous assumptions in the relationship between social life and nature. The commitment to sustainability has been limited by the way the society perceives its role in protecting the earth owing to diverse assumptions between humankind and the environment. The reading attempted to respond to the question about the impact of management theory and practices on the environment with respect to sustainability. The past dissociation of the management theory and practice from the natural environment can account for the limited management journals covering environmental related topics as asserted by Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1995). Despite the emerging trend in the availability of literature on organizational science very few organizations focus on the simple environmental factors that they cannot do without such as the conservation of the surrounding ecosystem. From this reading, I have learnt the importance of an integrative paradigm of sustainability in advancing efforts to achieve sustainable development. Sustainable development encompasses three key areas including creation of sustainable societies, economics and sustainable environment. This reading provides a more comprehensive definition of sustainability serving to expound the definition provided in Week 1 work. According to this reading, sustainability is defined as the relationship between human economic systems and the ecological systems, in which the human life can be maintained indefinitely. The definition includes an implication that human activities must permit development of human cultures but with limited negative impacts on the ecosystem (Gladwin, Kennelly & Krause 1995). Sustainable development entails a process in which the entire community participates in creating and pursuing a vision aimed at ensuring sustainable use of the available resources. Sustainable development mainly entails activities and policies aimed at promoting interdependence among social, economic and environmental factors. Sustainability not only involves environmental issues but encompasses technological, political, economic and population changes that may also influence the wellbeing of future generations. The concept of equality also influences the move towards sustainable development in which fair distribution of resources also impact on the sustainability of such resources. I have understood that efforts towards sustainable development may be greatly undermined by the distribution of the natural resources that ought to be used in a sustainable way. Unequal distribution of resources triggers competition in the use of the available resources leading to unsustainable exploitation. This reading further drags normative ethical theories in that in the process of promoting sustainability, the need to delineate between right and wrong activities or actions emerges. Through this reading, I have been able to learn new terms such as technocentric, paradigms, sustaincentrism, and ecocentrism as applied in sustainable development studies. I have understood that neither the ecocentrism nor the technocentrism paradigms address the issues of sustainable development, leaving the sustaincentrism as the only viable paradigm in advancing sustainable development (Johnson 1995). In this paradigm, the focus is not totally placed on how the human person best fits into his environment or nature but also viewed as part of the nature. The sustaincentrism paradigm advances the view of development from the human perspective and the conservation point of view in a move to strike harmonious co-existence between nature and the human beings. Week 10: Overview of the Readings and Reflections The teachings of weeks one to six enhanced the understanding of the dynamic socio-cultural environment in which the corporate realm thrives. Importantly, the teachings emphasized the tenets of ethical frameworks that underpin crucial decision making while advancing the understanding of the issues concerning corporate responsibility and sustainability (Buselich 2002). The learning was underscored by the strategic learning scenarios that shaped an understanding of how new pressure mounts in the business world, and the concomitant models that shape the differentiated corporate responses. The sustainability concept, which was covered in Week 1’s reading, enhanced my awareness about the feasibility component that has become rhetoric in successful business practice. The reading of Campbell and Mollica (2009) ideologies about the phenomenon i learnt crucial lessons regarding the different ways the concept of bolsters success and visibility in corporate environmental obligations, business responsibility, and entrepreneurial governance. However, the ambiguity with which sustainability is interpreted in different corporate scenarios renders the concept vulnerable to meaninglessness. The ethics and sustainability teaching ingrained significant understanding of the varied ethical issues entwined with corporate responsibility and sustainability. The learning invigorated a mental situation that encourages active participation in visible decision making, and enabled the capacity to stage productive business discussions. Particularly, the Week 2 studies enhanced my critical thinking skills, and improved the understanding of how ethical decisions are formulated routinely in the corporate world. I acquired critical knowledge about the sense of morality and ethics that guide right or wrong decisions. Another crucial point of learning stemming from the detailed teaching revolved around the rationale of the emerging concept of free markets. By exploring the free market ideology and its concomitant implications on the 1980s and 1990s American economy, I gained substantial of the complexities of unregulated global trade systems. I learnt that inexperienced organizations, regardless of their hosting economy, could be distorted structurally and in terms of finances by the effects of free market. Conclusively, the reading about free and regulated markets let me understand the advantages of the mixed market principles (Johnson 1995), which appear adequate for settling economic problems that underlie the contemporary global economy. The concept of sustainable development was an interesting area of learning in that it appeared to integrate crucial rationales of ethics, sustainability, and normative theorems. However, Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1995) aired the characteristic lack of divergent literature covering the association of management theory and the environment, which spotlight the ambiguity of sustainability in the way it is applied in the corporate world. I gained substantial understanding of the sustainability discourse especially in its application in the social economic world. I was able to develop a conceptually coordinated understanding of the integrated nature of the topics covered in the course. It emerged that principles of ethics and sustainability are entwined. References Buselich, K. (2002). An outline of current thinking on sustainability assessment. Retrieved from http://www.environment-integration.eu/download/08- SustainAss/Outline_SustainabilityAssessment.pdf Campell, T., & Mollica, D. (2009). Introduction. In T. Campbell & D. Mollica (Eds). Sustainability Ashgate: Farnham, Surrey. D’ Amato, A., Henderson, S., & Florence, S. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and sustainable business: a guide to leadership tasks and functions. Center for Creative Leadership. Retrieved from Gladwin, T., Kennelly, J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: implications for management theory and research. Academic of Management Review 20 (4), 874-907. Johnson, P. (1995). Development of an ecological conscience: is ecocentrism a prerequisite. The Academy of Management Review 21 (3), 607-611. Kates, R., Parris, T., & Leiserowitz, A. (2005). What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development (3), 8-21. Pasternak, S. (2009). The ethical theories in ethical reasoning and behavior within organizations. Retrieved from http://www.tiisrael.org/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/sigalitpasternak.pdf Read More

Despite the importance of sustainability, I have established that its application has been criticized from different perspectives where it threatens other important principles in the business environment such as social responsibility. From the reading, I learnt that the sustainability principle has been criticized in circumstances where it has been thought to be applied with intention of absconding social responsibility in corporate operations. The preference for sustainability as opposed to corporate responsibility is associated with elimination of the term responsibility, which compels corporations to dedicate significant returns to support the welfare of the society.

I have been able to understand the drive behind the increased embracement of the concept of sustainable development, which is depicted in this reading as a new way of circumventing the inherent conflict between corporation’s profitability and social responsibility. In conclusion, the Week 1 reading has enhanced my conceptualization of the sustainability discourse, which appears to be “blameless” strategy that should be adopted in the corporate world amidst the increased concerns on the sustainability of natural resources.

I now have a broad view of the concept that may assist me to understand why some organizations do not implement certain decisions seen by other firms as sustainable. Week 2 Readings Week 2 reading played tremendously enhanced my understanding of how the normative ethical theories influence the process of making good decisions. Information from the chapter on normative theories of ethics serves to expound on the knowledge obtained from the previous chapter that explored the purposes of understanding ethics.

The chapter about normative ethical theories has enhanced my knowledge on the different approaches to morality often adopted in resolving ethical dilemmas. However, the readings have not resolved my greatest dilemma on how to determine whether something is right or wrong. I have been able to appreciate that conflicting individual interests, and conflict between the interest of an individual and those of the society are common issues in the community that require ethics to resolve differences arising from them.

I have been able to understand ethical theories as tools of answering the questions about how people ought to live or interact with one another bur not necessarily guidelines to a perfect life. An act may be termed as ethically right on a given situation but be interpreted as ethically wrong in a different situation depending on the context. Normative ethical theories generally emphasize on what majority of the members of the society believe to be norm. It is evident that ethical theories can be classified in terms of those concerned with the outcomes or consequences; and those concerned with rules or principles guiding the decision making process and ethical dilemma resolution.

Since different ethical theories raise different considerations in their applications, the choice of theory highly depends on the situation or the context. Under circumstances where the interest is in outcomes or consequences, the consequentiality theories emerge to be most applicable. The consequentiality moral theories include the egoism and the utilitarianism theories, in which the latter emphasizes on the interests of others in determining whether an act is good or bad while the former dwells in self-interests (Pasternak, 2009).

Application of the egoism theory faces several misconceptions including the belief that all egoists endorse hedonism in deciding what is good or wrong. The other misconception about egoism includes the belief that egoists cannot act honestly or promote other people’s interests because of the emphasis on self-interests. Nevertheless, attempts to advance individual interests may also require significant advancement of other people’s interests. Egoists may be forced to follow a rather longer route in achieving self interests, which may involve promotion of people’s interests with expectation the same will be reciprocated to them.

Read More