The Principles of the Production Method in Chicken Industry - Coursework Example

A case study for the production methods and trade in chicken industry Contemporary Management Issues Utilitarian Principles versus DeontologicalPrinciples Author's Name University's Name Abstract The purpose of this paper is to perform a case study for the production methods and trade in chicken industry in the UK based on two principles, Utilitarian and Deontological. We will use Utilitarian Principles "on behalf of the producers through to the supermarkets at the end of the supply chain"1 and Deontological Principles "to provide a counter argument in support of the consumer groups growing criticism of the production and trade in chicken (poultry) and chicken (poultry) products through to the supermarkets at the end of the supply chain."2 Utilitarian Principles There are some but not exactly the same definitions for utilitarianism in sources available but in the "American Heritage Dictionaries"3 there are three definitions:" 1. The belief that the value of a thing or an action is determined by its utility. 2. The ethical theory proposed by 'Jeremy Bentham' and 'James Mill' that all action should be directed toward achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. 3. The quality of being utilitarian: housing of bleak utilitarianism."4 "Utilitarianism is a system of values"5. This system's goal is to maximize the aggregate benefit for a population. Utilitarian say that "Happiness of people should be sacrificed only to bring greater happiness to other people."6 This may impose a negative feeling to anyone who is not familiar with this principle in detail, one may say: Does it worth to destroy minority's benefits to bring happiness to a majority What is the minority's fault In a wider point of view, some people may know utilitarianism as way to contrary Human Rights but utilitarian have answered to most of these questions or at least tried to bring a justification to disavow these ideas.7 "Utilitarianism consists of two doctrines: A theory of what is Right, and a theory of what is Good."8. In the first section of this case study we will try to bring enough justification via utilitarian principles to persuade the consumers that the Supply Chain's position is in the best form of it in the current situation of the Chicken Industry in the United Kingdom. "A revolution in the industrialisation and globalisation of our food system had led to chicken (poultry) being cheaper in our supermarkets today than twenty years ago. The supply chain of the industry consists of four key elements, the breeders, the factory farmers, the abattoirs/packers and the supermarkets. Consumer groups have in recent times been critical of every stage of the supply chain. The RSPCA considers "suffering of broiler chickens as one of the most pressing animal welfare issues in the UK today". Fifty percent of chickens entering the food chain are also known to carry campylobacter; a cause of food poisoning. Supermarkets have been criticised for using chicken in marketing promotions such as "buy one get one free" that cause farmers substantial loss of income."9 As mentioned before utilitarianism consists of two doctrines. The first one or "What is right" is actually Varieties of "Consequentialism". The first one is "Act Consequentialism" that states that an action is right only if it brings us benefits no matter if is a wrong decision. In our case study, the supply chain decides to sell the products in any way to prevent serious detriment to the whole system in long run no matter if it harms the consumer or cause farmers substantial loss of income. The best decision is the decision that gives the supply chain a benefit or prevents huge detriment. It is not important if a minority hurts or even become sacrificed. Farmers does hurt but they are a minority of the population. Customers hurt too but the supply chain decides to give them some incentive such as bringing the price to 50% via "buy one get one free" policy. This way, the chain and the consumers are happy but the farmers are not. This isn't much fair but it seems it is a selected option by the UK chicken industry. Although this option is the best for the supply chain, in Utilitarian Principles there are other options too and that is what makes different positions for different people if they had the current situation. One position is that the benefit is good to be for all but if there exists a benefit in the system, it must be shared to all and nut just the majority of people involved in the chain. The benefit must be diffuse to all but commensurate to the share of them in the industry. Maybe the second one is the most ideal option that still can be considered in the system. One final issue regarding the utilitarianism here is that this decision for sure is made under the control of the governmental agencies. If there has been a serious harm to threat the people, the government would have been trying to stop selling the chicken products for a while. Here it seems the only issue that has caused the supply chain make such a decision is that people had doubts about the products safety. Thing that needed some time to show everyone that with a little care, the chicken meat gives no harm if they know how to cook it and where to by from. Below is a summary some reports stated via MeatProcess.com, BBC and INDYMEDIA UK. "BBC survey another blow against UK chicken 17/08/2005 - Chicken consumption in the UK could suffer a temporary setback after a BBC report indicates chicken are highly contaminated with antibiotic resistant E. coli bacteria."10 "Poultry bugs spark poisoning fears Wednesday, 28 February, 2001, 02:07 GMT Too many consumers suffering from food poisoning are bearing the brunt of poor hygiene standards Raw meat should be kept and prepared separately from other food and be stored at the bottom of the fridge Meat should be cooked thoroughly until the juices run clear "11 The final headline is from INDYMEDIA UK 'It's safe to eat if cooked properly'12 " Half of the chicken on sale in UK in supermarkets is contaminated with campylobacter. Campylobacter causes a nasty kind of food poisoning with severe, often bloody diarrhoea.' -- Felicity Lawrence The eating of properly cooked poultry meat and eggs presents no risk to humans - these products are 110 per cent safe.' -- Nigel Horrox, president of British Veterinary Poultry Association."13 Deontological Principles In Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language there is a definition for the deontology," the theory of duty or moral obligation. "14 "Deontologists argue the rightness or wrongness of an action does not depend on the goodness or badness of its consequences. In contrast, consequentialism holds that the right act or system of rules is the one that maximizes or satisfies good consequences as determined by an imparital determination of good and evils. Deontological ethics typically is thought to involve two important elements: prerogatives and constraints. Prerogatives deny that agents must always seek to perform actions with optimistic consequences. Constraints place limits on what actions agents may undertake in an effort to bring about their own or the impartial good."15 In this case study we will try to bring enough justification via Deontological Principles to persuade supply chain that their position is in the current situation of the Chicken Industry in the United Kingdom has not made consumers and even farmers satisfied. In the supply chain, an unhandled problem has occurred and has caused the chicken industry products to be infected. In consumer's view the supply chain has to stop distributing the products till officials announce that the products are safe. In customers point of view the only idea that product distribution after announcement of meat infection should continues is not an excellent decision. The supply chain's decision to cut down the prices to 50% is not necessarily a correct decision. That is true that this decision prevents the supply chain to face with serious financial detriments and the consumers enjoy purchasing products for half price and almost everyone is happy at the end but the most important thing that is important for a consumer is the quality of a product he/she buys. They do not consider this decision as a right decision even if the over all benefit is for most of people. What a consumer expects from a producer is a good quality and safe products. The price is at a much lower level of expectancy. There are two famous deontological theories. "The most famous deontological theory is that of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. In his theory, Kant claimed that various actions are morally wrong if they are inconsistent with the status of a person as a free and rational being, and that, conversely, acts that further the status of people as free and rational beings are morally right. Therefore, Kant claimed, we all have a duty to avoid the first type of act and perform the second type of act. "16 Considering Kant's point of view, there are so many decisions taken in our environment that seems that they are giving maximize benefit to at least a majority but there may be people who are from the minority of population and they are in fact criticized of a right decision. These people here are farmers and at least a vast number of consumers that risking their life. What Kant wants us to do is to have the second type of action. Kant here wants the benefits be distributed equally between all supply chain including farmers and consumers. One important issue to be considered here is that the type of benefit a customer wants is not of a material type such as money, they only want moral benefits. They know the supply chain management responsible for providing meats with the best quality no matter how much the price is. "Of the five formulations of the categorical imperative Kant developed, the three most well-known and significant are: Act only according to that maxim by which you can also will that it would become a universal law. Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end. Act as though you were through your maxims a law-making member of a kingdom of ends."17 Kant is one of the respondents of Deontological Principles but there are other people that disagree with what he says exactly. He thinks this theory needs some modification because of a paradox." The most pressing difficulty for deontologist philosophers is justifying constraints. Robert Nozick famously points out what has become known as the paradox of deontology. If we are truly concerned about rights (such as the right not to be harmed in certain ways expressed by Kamm's Principle of Permissible Harm) then it seems logical we should seek to minimize violations of these rights. However, deontological constraints themselves prohibit such action. "18 An exact example of this theory is or case study at the supply chain. If we do not do anything regarding the problem, the supply chain will be broke entirely or faces with a lot of financial damage. It is better so criticize a minority ( farmers and customers moral rights ) to save the whole system but the principle permissible harm does not allow us to criticize anyone if we wish to do the same decision in deontological view to the problem. Comparing the both principles, we can clearly see that the second principle or Deontological Principle in a case that protects the right of a consumer is more important because the most important part of a supply chain is a person who consumes the product. If you do not provide reliability for a customer, you can not last in the market no matter how much you are equipped with technology or how good you are in your profession. You well remember the second form of utilitarian principle. In this study if we were bounded to it we could have more satisfaction from the farmers or other minority in the system. To remember, the second form of utilitarian principle wants the benefits and torts to be shared equally or rationally to all of the components of the system. In this case when a new decision is made, the prices are cut down to absorb customers attention, a less percent of the tort be applied to the farmers by financial aids from the supply chain or even the government or related organizations. Overall, both principles are like a tool. You can use it in both right and wrong way. If you use the utilitarian principle in a way that you only decide on what is right, you may fail to consider that although the result of the supply chain is good but there are part of your supply chain that will face with some torts. You can use the second way in this principle and share all the benefits and torts with everyone. You can also use the modified form of the deontological principle that has no paradox. References Peter Vardy & Paul Grosch, (1999), The puzzle of Ethics, London : Fount 1999, ISBN 0006281443 Andy Crane and Dirk Matten, Business ethics : a European perspective : managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization ,Oxford : Oxford University Press 2004, ISBN 0199255156 Fisher and Lovell 2003, Business Ethics and Values, Prentice Hall Harlow, ISBN 0273651943 www.answer.com, Utilitarianism, Available from http://www.answers.com/topic/utilitarianism , INTERNET Utilitarianism, Available from http://web.mit.edu/dmytro/www/Utilitarianism.htm Utilitarianism, Available from http://web.missouri.edu/johnsonrn/utilnote.html MeatProcess.com, News Headlines, By Ahmed Elamin, Available from http://www.meatprocess.com/news/ng.aspid=61941-poultry-e-coli-contamination News.bbc.co.uk, BBC Health, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1192827.stm Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, p. 378 (2d Coll. Ed. 1978) Wikipedia, Deontological ethics, Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontological_ethics#_note-0 Read More