Morality in Business Issues - Case Study Example

Ethics Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Business ethics refers to a predetermined behaviour or code of conduct that all business institutions and persons are supposed to observe and adhere to. Business ethics composes of moral guidelines that business entities and business persons are supposed to follow in decision making and the daily activities of the organization. More often than not, business persons find themselves in a dilemma or rather a comprising situation whereby their morality in business is put to test (Shaw et al., 2013). Kemal is between a rock and a hard place. The idea presented by his local manager to buy special gifts to few influential people and also offer a special gift to the transport minister seems like the easiest way to obtain the landing rights to Waskhazia. On one hand, Kemal can decide to go the local manager's way, offer special gifts to the minister and a few influential people, which, by the way, is a common thing in his organization but a camouflaged manner, and gain the landing rights quickly and beat his competitors Shaw et al., 2013). This will bring in profits for Kemal's airline, and he will in return get the promised bonus that he so much needs to cater for the needs of his family and those of the people who depend on him. Kemal will also get a promotion in his organization. On the other hand, Kemal can choose to do the right thing that is use the money allocated to pay for legal advice and meet other costs that come with obtaining the landing rights (Shaw et al., 2013). This process is slow since many legal formalities are involved. Taking this option does not guarantee Kemal that he will get the landing rights since his competitors might beat him in getting the deal. This would be detrimental to him since failing this deal means that he will not get the promised bonus and as thus his family will suffer and so will his other commitments (Shaw et al., 2013). Being in Kemal's shoes, the second option is alluring and cheap since it guarantees his a promotion and bonus and promotion. Obtaining the landing rights would also be a breakthrough for his organization but Kemal should not take this option presented by his local major. Giving gifts is not bad, and it is used to appreciate a gesture extended but in Kemal's case this is not gift giving but bribery (Shaw et al., 2013). This is because the gift is given with the expectation of nothing in return, unlike a bribe and in this case Kemal by giving the special gifts is expecting to gain the landing rights in Waskhazia. The airline that Kemal works for has a clear anti-corruption policy that Kemal is fully aware of, and Kemal is fully aware of the consequences that befall anyone who falls victim of the public eye in corruption Shaw et al., 2013).The Kantian theory of ethics dictates that one should do what is required as per the duty assigned and not what favours him or what works to his benefits. Kemal has been assigned the task of obtaining the landing rights for his organization legally and the money given to him is to cater for legal advice and other costs that he would meet and not to buy special gifts for certain persons to achieve this. The Kantian theory of morality further states that a good action has good purposes. Kemal by giving special gifts to the minister and other influential person juts want to pose unfair completion to their rival airline which is morally wrong. Competition should be on fair terms (Shaw et al., 2013). Contractarianism theory of ethics would also refute the offering of special gifts by Kemal to obtain the landing rights. The contractarianism theory talks of doing what is fair and right to the eyes of the society (Shaw et al., 2013). The theory refutes the idea of benefiting one person and putting the other at a disadvantage. It would be unfair to the second airline if Kemal offers the special gifts and gets the landing rights for his company. Kemal would have competed on unequal ground and denied the other airline the chance of proving itself worthy of the landing rights (Shaw et al., 2013). The society at large would not at all agree with the idea of Kemal giving gifts to get the landing rights since this would benefit him more but rather he should adhere to the terms and rules that he signed in the contract with his airline regardless of whether the airline is strict about it or not (Shaw et al., 2013). The divine command theory and virtue ethics theory would also back Kemal in giving the special gifts. These two theories talk about doing what is right both in the eyes of the people and the eyes of religion. This would obviously be rejecting the local managers suggestion and do what is right, and that is following the right procedures legally to obtain the landing rights (Shaw et al., 2013).In my opinion and backed by the ethical theories above Kemal should follow the right procedure in obtaining the landing rights and accept the outcome whether positive or negative (Shaw et al., 2013). In my opinion, this proposal is fair to Kemal, his family and the other airline. Fairness means doing things or acting in a manner that does not favour one party and disadvantages the other, regardless of what the other party is doing (Shaw et al., 2013).In this case, there is another airline involved, and it might also be using its mean and mechanism to obtain the landing rights. As thus it is open and all ears and if it smells fowl play in this deal, it might blow the whistle, and Kemal would be dismissed from his job and his family and other commitments would suffer (Shaw et al., 2013). If Kemal follows the legal procedure and if succeeds then it will be to his advantage and that of his family and he if he fails, then he does not face the risk of being dismissed due to corruption. This proposal is also fair to the other landline since the two airlines can compete on fair ground, and the best airline would be granted the landing rights based on merit (Shaw et al., 2013). My answer would not change at all even if giving of gifts were prohibited by law. As earlier stated, gifts are given as a sign of appreciation for something or a gesture already extended. In this case, Kemal would be giving the special gifts before and as thus these amounts to more of bribery rather than appreciation (Shaw et al., 2013).In this case, special gifts are just a polite reference to bribe since the law does not prohibit gift giving. The code of conduct in business ethics fully refutes the idea of bribery since it gives an advantage to the rich at the expense of the poor degrades the integrity of the institution. It also lowers human dignity (Shaw et al., 2013).If the government prohibited gift giving, it would help minimize cases of bribery by institutions and business persons since in most cases, bribes are given camouflaged as gifts with the aim of getting favour from the party receiving the gifts (Shaw et al., 2013). Bribery is not only in the form of money and special gifts. Bribes also come in terms non monetary and non material items such as overseas trips and entertainment (Shaw et al., 2013). In the gifts Kemal intends to give to the influential people and the transport minister comprise of lavish entertainment and overseas sporting events, my response would still go unaltered. In whichever form the gift is given, the motive remains the same. To gain the landing rights without following the relevant protocols are procedures (Shaw et al., 2013). The difference there is no tangible evidence that the gift was given or who is financing it. The person receiving the gift can travel overseas or even entertain himself lavishly and make it look like he is financing himself. In whichever manner, I would still oppose the idea of Kemal using gifts to evade the long procedures and bureaucratic hurdles to get the landing rights for his company (Shaw et al., 2013). In conclusion, morality in business issues is something that organizations and its persons should observe at all terms no matter how lucrative deals may seem when morality is withdrawn. Kemal has all the reasons to use the shortcuts to seal this deal for his company, but he cannot afford to think of only himself. He must also consider the consequences that would follow if the plan would backfire on him although he sees slim chances of this happening. Bribery in the form of gift giving not only lowers the integrity of our institution but it also lowers the dignity of the individual and disadvantages others at the expense of those with more power (Shaw et al., 2013). Reference Shaw, W. H., Barry, V. E., Issa, T., & Catley, B. (2013). Moral issues in business. South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning. Read More

Giving gifts is not bad, and it is used to appreciate a gesture extended but in Kemal's case this is not gift giving but bribery (Shaw et al., 2013). This is because the gift is given with the expectation of nothing in return, unlike a bribe and in this case Kemal by giving the special gifts is expecting to gain the landing rights in Waskhazia. The airline that Kemal works for has a clear anti-corruption policy that Kemal is fully aware of, and Kemal is fully aware of the consequences that befall anyone who falls victim of the public eye in corruption Shaw et al., 2013).The Kantian theory of ethics dictates that one should do what is required as per the duty assigned and not what favours him or what works to his benefits.

Kemal has been assigned the task of obtaining the landing rights for his organization legally and the money given to him is to cater for legal advice and other costs that he would meet and not to buy special gifts for certain persons to achieve this. The Kantian theory of morality further states that a good action has good purposes. Kemal by giving special gifts to the minister and other influential person juts want to pose unfair completion to their rival airline which is morally wrong. Competition should be on fair terms (Shaw et al., 2013). Contractarianism theory of ethics would also refute the offering of special gifts by Kemal to obtain the landing rights.

The contractarianism theory talks of doing what is fair and right to the eyes of the society (Shaw et al., 2013). The theory refutes the idea of benefiting one person and putting the other at a disadvantage. It would be unfair to the second airline if Kemal offers the special gifts and gets the landing rights for his company. Kemal would have competed on unequal ground and denied the other airline the chance of proving itself worthy of the landing rights (Shaw et al., 2013). The society at large would not at all agree with the idea of Kemal giving gifts to get the landing rights since this would benefit him more but rather he should adhere to the terms and rules that he signed in the contract with his airline regardless of whether the airline is strict about it or not (Shaw et al., 2013). The divine command theory and virtue ethics theory would also back Kemal in giving the special gifts.

These two theories talk about doing what is right both in the eyes of the people and the eyes of religion. This would obviously be rejecting the local managers suggestion and do what is right, and that is following the right procedures legally to obtain the landing rights (Shaw et al., 2013).In my opinion and backed by the ethical theories above Kemal should follow the right procedure in obtaining the landing rights and accept the outcome whether positive or negative (Shaw et al., 2013). In my opinion, this proposal is fair to Kemal, his family and the other airline.

Fairness means doing things or acting in a manner that does not favour one party and disadvantages the other, regardless of what the other party is doing (Shaw et al., 2013).In this case, there is another airline involved, and it might also be using its mean and mechanism to obtain the landing rights. As thus it is open and all ears and if it smells fowl play in this deal, it might blow the whistle, and Kemal would be dismissed from his job and his family and other commitments would suffer (Shaw et al., 2013). If Kemal follows the legal procedure and if succeeds then it will be to his advantage and that of his family and he if he fails, then he does not face the risk of being dismissed due to corruption.

This proposal is also fair to the other landline since the two airlines can compete on fair ground, and the best airline would be granted the landing rights based on merit (Shaw et al., 2013). My answer would not change at all even if giving of gifts were prohibited by law. As earlier stated, gifts are given as a sign of appreciation for something or a gesture already extended. In this case, Kemal would be giving the special gifts before and as thus these amounts to more of bribery rather than appreciation (Shaw et al., 2013).

Read More