Critical Business Ethics in Global Workplace Human Relations - Coursework Example

Critical Business Ethics in Global Workplace Human Relations Global ethics are guidelines for organizations in their global operations. However, what is considered ethical behavior is not as clear as it should be in a world where different levels of economic development are involved. In this paper, ethics are discussed specifically on a global perspective with specific reference from the recent Credit Suisse case. Firms’ and Legal rules provide the guidelines for decision-making within organizations. Nevertheless, there are still numerous gray areas uncovered by legislation. Various organizations around the world develop ethical principles and guidelines for their employees, where ethics involve the standards on what is right and what is wrong conduct (Renz 2010). However, in the global setting it is more complex to decide what is good or what bad conduct is. In actuality, it is a firm’s social responsibility that comes into debate at this juncture. Over the past decade, there have been numerous ideas presented about the appropriate mode of ethical conduct in global business firms in a global setting. Immense interest in topics such as improper treatment of workers, faulty products that lead to consumer endangerment or inconvenience damage to the environment, as well as ethical conduct issues among countries, organizations, and individuals. However, the heightened sensitivity in the matter and the increasing global competition has created quite the difficult management situation for firms all over the globe. On the other hand, globally active firms, now more than ever, must devise strategies that will ensure their organizations’ are not in the crossfire arising from the increasing focus on ethical conduct. Additionally, firms must develop strategies that carry out additional costs arising as a result of implementation of global ethical standards. The purpose of this paper is to discuss in detail the ethical behavior of firms, especially those that are active globally. The paper unfolds as three sections: First, introduction to the matter in hand. Later, a discussion of the various ethical frameworks in relation to the Credit Suisse case. In the third and final section, a conclusion and personal comments regarding the matters discussed. Ethics can be defined simply as the guiding principles that assist us determine what is right and what is wrong. These guiding principles are the parameters by which the business organizations operate. Ethical behavior implies that individuals behave in the manner acceptable by the organization and society as a whole (Bopp & Smith 2011). Researchers have proposed similar definitions, for example; ethics refers to the standards used to determine the wrongness or rightness of an individual’s relations to others in terms of justice and truth. business ethics is the compilation of rules that stipulate the manner in which organizations and their employees are supposed to conduct themselves; management ethics is essentially as a collective set of principles as the agreed upon compilation of standards. As is evident from these definitions, the ethics field covers voluntary actions and moral judgments as to what is proper and what is not. The increasing concern about the issue of ethics in the global business world today is closely linked to the social responsibility issue that can be defined as doing societal good minimally related or totally unrelated to the business venture in view. Whatever title is issued, social responsibility or ethics, the collection of literature describing theories of business ethics is vast. Note, focus on the matter of ethics has shifted its weight from religious and theological matters to issues of social responsibility, ecology, social problems, and recently, business ethics. Global Ethics The expansion of the international business community has urged multinational corporations to evolve global ethical standards. One basic reason at the root of this fact could be the continuous quest for new competitive advantages by the multinational organizations. Ethical capabilities are a vital source of stable advantage, just as weighty as financial, technological, organizational capabilities and strategic advantages. Ethical capacity can be defined as a firms ability to identify and address effectively, the ethical issues in a global context (Okeja 2012). These are; respect of differences, upholding trust among counterparts, and promoting uprightness. In addition, the basis of global ethics is based mainly on self-understanding, appreciation for the unique, lenience of differences, and a keen interest in the unknown. Global ethics is meant to emerge from an agreement among nations, corporations, societies, and other organizations in regard to the appropriate ethical conduct and frameworks in any situation. It is similarly assumed that the global business ethics consider moral reasoning and moral attitudes; however, the relationship between the two is unclear. It comes as a surprise that people of different backgrounds and cultures could share similar attitudes toward some questionable business practices, whereas their reasoning process is established on different values. Some of these reasoning processes or rather, ethical frameworks, in respect to the global business world, focusing mostly on the Credit Suisse case are as discussed below. The Utilitarian Perspective Utilitarianism is a moral theory that gauges the wrongness or rightness of an action in terms of its effect. The doctrine of utilitarianism can be drawn as far back as to Jeremy Bentham’s writings, an Englishman who lived in the nineteenth century. Broken down to its fundamentals, utilitarianism is a principle of morality that dictates that morally right courses of action are the ones that produce the best balance between benefits and harms for everyone the action affects. As long as an action produces maximum benefits for every person, it does not matter to utilitarianism that the benefits may have been produced by manipulation, coercion, or lies. Legislators, scientists, and analysts weigh every day the ensuing benefits and harms of their actions when they make decisions, for example, whether to invest resources in a certain project, whether to approve new drugs, or whether to ban a certain fertilizer. Utilitarianism offers a fairly straightforward form of determining the morally upright action for any situation we find ourselves in (Mawere 2011). In order to discover what one ought to do in any setting, one must first determine all the potential courses of action in place. Second, one must determine all probable benefits and harms that may result from each of the potential actions for every person affected by the actions. Finally, one must choose a course of action that provides the best possible benefits subsequent to the costs being considered. The general principle of utilitarianism is that morality depends on the balance of benefits and harm of an action, which directs an individual or an organization towards taking the morally correct and ethical courses of action. In the Credit Suisse case, the Swiss bank erred in weighing the consequences of their decision by intentionally and knowingly helping United States citizens file false income tax returns. They failed to consider the negative effects that course of action would have, not only on the bank and its reputation but on the eight Credit Suisse bankers who were indicted by the Justice Department, their clients, and the foiled business relation between the two nations. In other words, based on the utilitarianism perspective on ethics the Swiss bank made an unethical decision and took an unethical action by assisting United States taxpayers avoid their duty. In addition, I believe that Switzerland and the U.S had a moral pluralism form of relationship based on trust, which is why it was possible for citizens of the U.S to conduct transactions with the Swiss bank. The Rights Perspective Prior to discussing the responsibility imposed on human rights, I should recount the basic principles of the global ethic. Global ethic is not a totally new ideology; it does not make the specific ethics of various philosophies null, it is also untrue to consider global ethic a substitute for any religious doctrine (Kuokkanen 2012). Global ethic is simply a necessary set of common values and basic attitudes. Any person absolutely interested in upholding human rights must also be ready to accept a change of consciousness in regard to human responsibilities and obligations. Globalization demands global ethic. The InterAction Council (IAC) declaration is not a detached document. The doctrine responds to the demand by significant international organizations for global ethical codes documented in the reports by both the World Commission on Culture and Development (1995) and the UN Commission on Global Governance (1995). The topic of the global ethic has also been discussed severally at the World Economic Forum (WEF) as well as the UNESCO Universal Ethics Project. A great deal of attention is similarly being paid to the matter in Asia. In the words of Mahatma Gandhi, it is impossible to have human rights without accepting the responsibilities that accompany them. Human responsibilities and obligations reinforce their human rights. Human Responsibilities support the declaration of Human Rights from a perspective of ethics as is already stated clearly in the preamble: ‘therefore we renew and reinforce the commitments allowed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: full acceptance of dignity for of all people, their equality and freedom, as well as their solidarity with each other.’ The offence committed by Credit Suisse, by assisting a selected number of American citizens avoid their obligation by hiding their incomes in fraudulent nominee accounts, destroying account records and hand-delivering money from those accounts to help its clients avoid tax payments amounted to a promotion of inequality. This act is in clear violation of the preamble provided in the Universal Doctrine of Human Rights above. The Swiss bank acted unethically by failing to perform its Human Responsibility of promoting freedom and equality of all people by giving unfair advantage to a selected few. A Virtue Perspective The virtue perspective focuses on character traits, dispositions, or attitudes that enable individuals and organizations to act in a manner that develops the human potential (Harris 2010). For example, faithfulness, honesty, trustworthiness, courage, compassion, integrity, and so forth. The principle of virtue dictates that what is ethical is that which promotes moral virtues in us as well as our communities. For most of us, the basic queries of ethics is, ‘How should I act?’ and ‘What should I do?’ Ethics is meant to avail people and organizations with universal rules or ‘moral principles’ that guide us on what to do. For example, most people adhere to the passionate principle of the utilitarianism perspective, where everyone has a duty to perform acts that will achieve the best results for the largest amount of people. On the other hand, others are devoted to Immanuel Kant’s fundamental principle in which every person has an obligation to act only in a manner that is respectful to the moral rights of all people and to human dignity.` According to the virtue perspective, there are various ideals, such as dedication or excellence to a common good, towards which individuals and organizations ought to strive, and that allow full development of human potential. These ideals are only achieved through thought and reflection on the potential of human beings. Virtue is character, dispositions, traits, or attitudes that enable people to act in ways that promote this potential. Virtue enables us to pursue ideals that we have reflected upon and adopted. Virtue is inclusive of integrity, self-control, courage, honesty, compassion, prudence, fidelity, generosity, and fairness. From the definition alone, it is evident that the Credit Suisse acted contrary to the doctrines of the ethics of virtue. The Swiss bank failed to act in honesty, faithfulness, trustworthiness, and compassion. Furthermore, as stated by United States Deputy Attorney General James Cole, Credit Suisse failed to act in integrity by failing to take the necessary remedial measures even during the proceeding of corporate investigation. Making their offence downright unethical based on the ethics of virtue. Ethics of Care Ethics of care is an alternative ethical theory such as virtue ethics and utilitarianism. The ethics of care places a lot of stress on the force of responsibility to address the requirements of the dependent. Care can be considered both a practice and a value. Ethics of care values the moral emotions, for example, empathy, sympathy, responsiveness and sensitivity, and even anger can be a composing factor of indignation that ought to be felt where people have been treated inhumanely or unjustly. The ethics of care does not depend on emotions alone as its guide to moral behavior and judgment; rather, it places emphasis on the fact that caring involves actions through which the caregiver responds to claims of individuals with whom he or she shares a relationship (Aristotle & Peters 2007). It can similarly be described as a practice that involves the act of offering care by which the action of care can be evaluated. Traditionally ethical concepts are rather individualistic; however, the ethics of care is essentially relational as opposed to individualistic. As mentioned above, the relationship between the United States and Switzerland was based on moral pluralism where both countries parties accommodated each others laws and regulations. The Credit Suisse breached the ethics of care by violating an already existent relationship between the nations. The bank acted unethically by erring in displaying responsiveness and sensitivity by assisting U.S citizens avoid their national duty. The Justice Department, having had the United States government treated unjustly, acted according to the ethics of care, rightfully charging, prosecuting, and fining the Swiss bank in indignation. A Non-Essentialist Perspective Essentialism, in philosophy is the notion that for any entity, there exists a set of properties or characteristics or all of which an entity of that kind ought to possess. Hence, all things are definable. From that perspective, it follows that words or terms ought to have single meanings and definitions. Simply put, essentialism is generalization, stating that some properties possessed by a certain group, for example, people, organizations, ideas, and so forth, are universal, and independent of individual context. For example, ‘human beings are mortal’. Essentialism suggests that members of specific groups may possess other characteristics, of which are not needed to establish their membership in their individual groups The essentialism view is countered with non-essentialism. Non-essentialism presents that for any entity, no specific traits are preset for that kind of entity. Non-essentialism in philosophy, is the notion that an entity cannot be defined in specified characteristics or values, which the entity must possess in order to identify as that entity. Essentialists classically claim that some entities are wrong in an irrefutable manner, for example, murder breaks the socially and ethically natural moral law. In ethics, non-essentialism claim that right and wrong are not moral boundaries that are individually constructed (Sameeksha 1966). This is to say, actions that are ethically wrong or right are actions that an individual deems harmful or beneficial respectively. Therefore, the ethical theory of non-essentialism is perfectly applicable to the Credit Suess case. Mr. Cole stated that the Credit Suisse’s agreement to pay the fine and restitution of $US2.5 billion indicates the bank’s acceptance of responsibility for the offence. This proves that the Swiss bank was perfectly aware that its actions were ethically wrong and that its effect was going to be harmful, deeming their actions unethical based on the non-essentialist perspective. Conclusion In conclusion, multinational corporations should establish strict definite globally integrative corporate principles and laws that are locally responsive and establish an ethical culture that never allows favor towards any given organization on issues of ethical conduct (Friedman 2008). To establish principles of global ethics is essential but nonetheless insufficient to monitor or control ethical behavior. Senior officers and junior employees in organizations must concurrently possess the organizational support, motivation, and ability to adopt and implement the internal principles of ethics as well as the global codes and law of conduct and must, therefore, receive training for this purpose. In addition, the selection criteria for organizational personnel working abroad must be inclusive of ethical considerations, for example, sensitivity to cultural diversity, differences in moral development, the ability to make sound decisions where domestic and foreign interests collide, and overall ethical applications. In addition, it is necessary to note that the relationship between the United States and Switzerland/Swiss bank was one of moral pluralism where both parties were meant to accommodate the other’s laws and policies, a relationship that was clearly violated (Moon 2001). This all sound extremely promising and workable, unfortunately, acts of fraud, corrupt practices, and vast abuses are found all over the world in virtually all aspects of life. As opposed to emphasizing on these unethical practices organizations should try to apply ethics positively by establishing codes and principles such as those that deal with honesty, justice, beauty, freedom, loyalty, and order. Of equal importance, employee training must include all the topics discussed. Bibliography ARISTOTLE, & PETERS, F. H. (2007). The Nicomachean ethics. London, K. Paul, Trench, Trübner. BOMBAY, SAMEEKSHA. (1966). Economic and political weekly. Trust. BOPP, R. E., & SMITH, L. C. (2011). Reference and information services: an introduction. Santa Barbara, Calif, Libraries Unlimited. FRIEDMAN, T. L. (2008). The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. Vancouver, Douglas & McIntyre. HARRIS, M. L. (2010). Gifts of virtue, Alice Walker, and womanist ethics. New York, Palgrave Macmillan. KUOKKANEN, A. (2012). Constructing ethical patterns in times of globalization: Hans Küngs global ethic project and beyond. Leiden, Brill. MAWERE, M. (2011). Moral degeneration in contemporary Zimbabwean business practices. Bamenda, Cameroon, Langaa Rpcig. MOON, J. D. (2001). Constructing Community Moral Pluralism and Tragic Conflicts. Princeton, Princeton University Press. OKEJA, U. B. (2012). Normative justification of a global ethic a perspective from African philosophy. Lanham, MD, Lexington Books. RENZ, D. O. (2010). The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and management. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass. Read More