Ethical Challenge for Human Resources Management and Employment Relations Professionals - Literature review Example

Ethical challenge for HRM/ER professionals Your name University name An organization consists of a group of individuals who work together to achieve a common purpose. Since these individuals have different backgrounds, there is need for the organization to have an HR department that takes into consideration their needs and problems in ensuring they are motivated toward the achievement of organizational objectives. Professional HR/ER therefore constitutes to the execution of all activities and practices by trained individuals such as communicating and executing HR decisions; shaping, redirecting and altering the employees’ lives; making hiring, promotion and rewarding decisions; making firing as well as laying-off decisions and many others with the intention of improving the organizational performance (Jackson, Schuler & Werner, 2011; Palmer & Finney, 2004). In conducting these activities, HRM/ER professionals often find themselves in difficult situations which require them to systematically analyse the ethical dilemmas associated with these situations in attempts to arrive at an appropriate decision. For instance, laying-off employees harms the targeted individuals, and may as well undermine the energy and commitment of the survivors. Although HR practice may devastate one while it inspires the other, HRM/ER professionals have to accomplish them for the greater good of what it is intended to serve. However, the HRM/ER professionals must understand the underlying ethical problem; and evaluate the values, assumptions and judgments associated with it before acting (Pride, Hughes & Kapoor, 2011). Managers should understand what is good and bad (or right and wrong) in human conduct when making ethical decisions in a business context (referred to as business ethics). They should consider the trade-off between hindering one party and advancing organizational interests in order to make an appropriate decision. Faced with a situation where the HRM/ER professional has no clear or right answer, the individual has to find a better, more rigorous and inclusive ethical decision. This paper identifies and analyses the key issues presented in the case, ‘Something about Frank’. In this case, Frank (a chief financial officer and a member of the Executive Committee) was to help the CEO in determining the right way to downsize the company in response to rapid changes in their business. Based on Frank’s recommendations, the lay-off was to be done by considering the annual performance review scores of the employees. They would draw a line at some point on the employees’ ranking and those below the line would be laid off (Shanks, 1997). However, there arose some issues of ethical concern on the employee reviews where some employees were not evaluated and yet professionalism requires them to be. Having been asked about the matter, Frank was told that these employees had not been formally evaluated ever since they were employed and that the CEO was aware of it. Further, the CEO responded that it was as well their time to retire. The decision to lay them off without any evidence to show their underperformance remains questionable. Frank has been faced with a moral dilemma on what to do on this situation. If these employees are laid off, they may file a lawsuit against the company and if they are not, the performance of the company will go down. Another challenge lies on whether it is ethically right to evaluate other employees in some departments while in other they do not. Frank has to take into considerations the various ethical dimensions on these issues before making his final recommendations. According to Shaw (2010), business ethics involve one of the three aspects: avoiding breaking of the law in job-related tasks, avoiding actions that may lead to lawsuits, and avoiding activities and practices that may affect the company’s reputation. Since these three aspects may lead to loss of money or the company’s reputation, Frank has to find an amicable solution to the ethical dilemma that faces him while considering his understanding on morality and thus keeping out of trouble. As an HRM professional, Frank must understand the principles and elements of ethics so that he can make an appropriate moral decision. It is through adequate moral reasoning that he is able to arrive at a fair action which can be justifiable in determining ethics in business. Mandal (2001) proposes the need to examine a situation deeper in order to understand the moral dimension involved such as utility, rights, duties, justice, fairness ad care in supporting as well as revealing whether an action is right or wrong, respectively. HRM professionals have to demonstrate these aspects since they form the foundation of ethical principles. The approaches to ethical decision making include: utilitarian theory, theory of rights and duties and theory justice (McGee, 2004). All these theories form the basis of business ethics and thus necessitate the common understanding of business conduct. In fact, they form the basic norm for the establishment of whether a policy or action is ethical. Frank has a number of options to choose depending on the ethical approaches he uses. For instance, Frank must first evaluate the possible solutions by considering the benefits and costs that it imposes on the society. Therefore, in choosing an appropriate action, he should consider the one that produces the greatest net benefits for the greatest number of individuals associated with the business and the society as well. In determining the net profit, Fraedrich & Ferrell (2011) argues that all the benefits and costs (either financial or otherwise) should be taken into consideration. Basically, the approach of utilitarianism advocates that an action is considered to be morally right if it actually produces the greatest benefits to a maximum number of individuals. In this approach, Frank must consider the costs and benefits (both direct and indirect) of the intended actions on both the individuals involved so as to make comparisons to figure out the one that has greater benefits for many individuals or the society. He should either choose to work with the company’s culture and do away with the three employees based on the CEO’s suggestion that it is their time to retire or alternatively, suggest to the business managers to carry out a formal evaluation on them and determine their performance. The other approach he can adopt is the theory of rights and duties. This approach is important in understanding ethics, and more especially in making moral decisions in business operations and dealings. According to Johnson & Reath (2011), the rights are of two types: legal and moral. Legal rights are set by the constitution of the nation or jurisdiction within which a business or an individual operates while moral rights devolve from moral standards and social norms that aim to protect individuals in order to survive in the society. The moral rights are independent of any legal system but are based on humanitarian considerations since they protect the basic human needs of an individual (McGee, 2004; Truscott & Crook, 2004). Having considered this approach, Frank would propose that it would be morally right for the company to employ their kids on moral grounds of sustenance and support for the family. The company is, however, legally bound to compensate them as per its laws or service contract, and is not bound to employ the family members. The theory of moral rights and duties offer a basis for moral judgements in relation to an individual’s well being or welfare and protection of rights and interests. Businesses are bound to operate under mutually understood contractual obligations and duties. According to Lippert-Rasmussen (2005), deontology involves recognition of duties based on what is morally right. In addition to these doctrines of wrong or right, deontology claims duties of beneficence, duties of non-maleficence, duties of justice, duties of self-improvement, duties of reparation, professional duties, duties of gratitude, and duties of promise-keeping. Darwall (2003) argues that moral judgements that relate to individual well being or protection of his rights and interests are made based on the moral rights of the society. It involves the protection of individuals from the interference of others in attempts to pursue their legal or moral rights and promoting their welfare and well being. On the other hand, morality for the greater benefit of the society is solved through the utilitarian approach. For a healthy business or society, individual moral rights should be recognized in order for them to pursue their interests without any interference from others, even though the obstruction or interference leads to the greater societal benefits than the benefits gained in pursuit of self interests (Hinman, 2007). It is generally argued that moral rights takes precedence over utilitarianism in solving organizational disputes or conflicts of morality, unless the consequences of the action on the business is so great that a choice of greater benefits or lesser harm will be preferred. However, unlike consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism, deontological theories hold that moral standards and values cannot be determined by the activities that promote the best outcomes. Mandal (2001) argues that business operations involves the imposition and application of contractual rights and duties as well as verbal agreements of rights, duties and responsibilities that pertain to the performance of assigned tasks. In contrast to utilitarian approach, an individual has the moral right to do an action irrespective of its utilitarian benefits. In support to this point of view, the Kantian philosophy propagate the concept of moral rights and duties based on the proposition that all individuals have their own moral rights and duties regardless of the effect that their execution may impose on other. Kant argued that everyone in the society has the moral right of being treated equally with others and, in turn, they have to treat them in a similar manner (Johnson & Reath, 2011). Kant’s philosophy proposes that an action is morally right for an individual in a given situation if the reason for carrying out the action is equally good for others to adopt under similar circumstances. The employees should be allowed to defend themselves before being laid off in confirmation that there were no biases in the evaluation. Secondly, an action is considered to be morally right for an individual if in the process of executing the action, the person doesn’t use others as a means to achieve his self interests but rather, respect one another and have the equal opportunity to do so or choose freely. Kantianism could favour the three employees not be terminated from their work by giving them the due respect in their contractual agreement. Kant’s principle safeguards the ethics in any contractual dealing in a business especially those that benefits the workers. The theory of justice and fairness involves the guarantee for just and morally acceptable decisions. It demands that an individual’s actions be guided by equity, fairness and impartiality. The ethics of care, on the other hand, involves the demonstration of extra care and consideration in protecting an individual from a given situation. It involves a deeper examination of the situation so as to promote and safeguard the interests of those involved in the situation as long as they remain moral and legal (Weiss, 2008). It would have been fair for a formal evaluation to be carried on all the employees so that any decision to lay off the employees would be justified. This approach would have called for a re-evaluation on every employee, be it long or short serving. HRM/ER professionals are required to be very careful in making ethical decisions in the workplace so that the business does not run into trouble and to maintain a good reputation within the society for increased performance. Once faced with an ethical challenge, they need to respond to it by considering all the ethical dimensions that the situation presents. Among the ethical approaches that can be used to arrive at an appropriate decision include consequentialist theories such as utilitarianism, deontological theories like rights and duties, and justice and fairness. In Frank’s case, utilitarianism approach would be the best. Frank would choose to consider the evaluation scores as they were presented and lay off the non-performing employees as well as the other three whose time to retire had reached. References Darwall, S. L. (2003). Deontology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Fraedrich, C. & Ferrell, H. (2009). Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Hinman, L. M. (2007). Ethics: A pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Jackson, S., Schuler, R. & Werner, S. (2011). Managing Human Resources. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Johnson, O. & Reath, A. (2011). Ethics: Selections from Classic and Contemporary Writers. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Lippert-Rasmussen, K. (2005). Deontology, Responsibility, and Equality. Copenhagen Museum Tusculanum Press Mandal, S. K. (2010). Ethics in Business & Corp Governance. New Jersey: Tata McGraw-Hill Education. McGee, R. (2004). Some Neglected Economic & Ethical Aspects of Affirmative Action and Diversity Policies. Journal of Accounting, Ethics & Public Policy 3 (1), 246-268 Palmer, J. & Finney, M. (2004). The Human Resource Professionals' Career Guide: Building a Position of Strength. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. Pride, W., Hughes, R. Kapoor, J. (2011). Business. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Shanks, T. (1997). Executive Director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University. Shaw W (2010). Business Ethics: A Textbook with Case. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Truscott, D. & Crook, K. (2004). Ethics for the Practice of Psychology in Canada. Canada: University of Alberta. Weiss, J. W. (2008). Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. Read More