Ethics, Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development - Coursework Example

Running Head: Ethics, Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development Ethics, Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development (Name) (Course) (Instructor’s name) (Date) Abstract Decision making process is an integral part in any organization. The processes of decision making are based in various concepts including utilitarianism and moral rights conduct. Moral rights conduct entails an act as ethical in its own view while utilitarianism entails an act as moral based on the results it produces. In the context of decision making in an organization, the moral rights conduct is deemed appropriate as it helps in shaping and bringing out positive long term results to both the organization and its people. Consequently, corporate social responsibility is critical in the sustainable development. Introduction Every entity has the responsibility to act or make decisions that will benefit the society in general. This duty involves performing actions that will advance social goals or shunning away from harmful behaviors. Currently, many business owners are faced with complex ethical dilemmas, such as whether to lay off workers to increase profits, or to reduce products’ quality in order to meet deadlines. It is important for entities to consider ethical behavior in order to make ethical decisions and ensure sustainable development. There are various approaches that can be used in order to make ethical decisions such as moral rights and utilitarianism. This essay will focus on ethics paying special attention to moral rights approach and utilitarianism to ethical decision making; and sustainable development. Comparison and Contrast between utilitarian and moral rights approach in decision making Utilitarian approach The utilitarian approach to ethical reasoning emphasizes on taking the action that is deemed to result to the highest good to the largest number of people. It focuses on the utility that can be produced by a certain decision or action. For instance, let’s say an organization wants to relocate their production facilities from one nation to another. Questions may arise as to the degree of good and harm expected from such a decision. If the degree of good surpasses the degree of harm, then the utilitarian yardstick deems such a decision as an ethical one. This approach deals with the repercussions; it tries to amplify the good done and to lessen the degree of harm (Raiborn & Dinah, 1990). The utilitarian approach also covers cost –benefit analysis. This means that, while making a decision, the costs and benefits are compared. In most cases, the costs and benefits are measured in social, economic, emotional or human terms. After comparing these costs with the outcomes of the action, and if the benefits exceeds the costs, then the decision or action can be termed as ethical. In this approach it is the ends/consequences that determine the ethics of an act but not the action itself or the actor’s intent. Moral rights approach The moral rights approach to decision making concerns itself with moral standards regardless of the repercussions. Under this approach, some decisions or actions are considered to be either right or wrong. For instance, if a company wants to remain competitive in the market and retain its market share by paying low wages to the employees, if paying these low wages is depraved, then the company’s desire to such competition and retain its market share is not a satisfactory justification. Under the moral approach, the company should close down the business if it can not operate by paying its employees better wages in spite of the competitors actions. The company’s decision to pay low wages is considered unethical. In the moral rights approach, it is the action that determines the morality of an action but not the ends or results of an act (Trevino & Michael, 2004). Comparison and Contrast Moral rights approach differs considerably from utilitarian views in ethical decision making. In the moral rights approach, the deontologists do not believe in harming individuals in order to benefit. They believe that individuals should be treated with respect and should not be treated as the means to an end. In this approach, it is the decision that determines the morality of an action but not the end results of an action. On the other hand, the utilitarianism approach believe on making decisions that will result to greatest good to the highest number of people. It focuses on the results of an action and if the benefits outweigh the costs, then the decision is considered as ethical. In this approach it is the ends/consequences that determine the ethics of an act but not the action itself or the actor’s intent. However, both of these approaches aim at attaining positive outcomes irrespective of the means used to obtaining such results. Why the utilitarian approach not the best approach to ethical decision making The utilitarian approach is considered as one of the consequentialist approaches in the field of ethics. These approaches require that, human beings should act in a manner that yields positive outcomes. The approach does not take into consideration certain issues such as the type of performed or the intentions of carrying out such an act. What it considers is the general outcome of the act, which is intended to be positive (Paine, 1994). One major disadvantage of the utilitarian approach is that it appears to be impractical in helping one to make moral decisions (Thomas, 1991). The person may be able to determine the possible immediate and direct impacts of his actions, but becomes hard to determine the indirect and long-term outcomes. Some acts may attain positive outcomes over a short period but may yield to adverse impacts in the end. In some cases, when an individual is faced with a problem he ends up making speedy decisions, which to him might help solve the problem in the short term, but when such decisions are weighed and long term effects considered, the results might prove to be extremely harmful. Therefore, in order to come up with useful moral decisions, clear and concrete measures have to be put in place. The other disadvantage of this approach is that it can be easily used to violate the rights of a minority group or an individual for the benefit of a majority (Linda, 1986). For example, if a utilitarian has the option of choosing whether to carry out a painful scientific study on a mentally retarded child or not. He is certain that the results of his study will yield good results that would help save lives of thousands of mentally retarded children. So he goes on to carry out his study, despite the fact that this child is undergoing some pain, which might even lead to his death at the expense of saving other lives. This cannot be considered as a moral decision. The approach can also be applied to breach the principles of justice. The principle of justice requires that all people be treated fairly and punishment or reward should be determined by their own merit (Trevino & Michael, 2004). For instance suppose a utilitarian has a brother who is a thief. The police get hold of the thief and the utilitarian testimony in court would lead to the conviction his brother. As a utilitarian, he will be forced to bear false witness in order to allow the court release his brother even though for sure he knows that his brother is a thief. Briefly, the utilitarian approach is not the best approach for arriving at a moral decision. It is basically concerned with the outcome of the decision regardless of the means applied in achieving that outcome or the intentions of performing that act, as long as the outcomes are positive. It is hard to accurately determine the costs and benefits since the decisions that are made are often based on short-term basis. How multinational companies attain sustainable development Currently the global multinational companies have been using diverse techniques in order to attain the goal of sustainable development globally. These companies are the key drivers to globalization thus may be held responsible for failure or success of sustainable development. Corporate social responsibility is one of the initiatives that have been used as a remedy for the limitations of globalization that hinder the attainment of sustainable development. These limitations include environmental degradation, inequalities in wealth, and unfair labor practices (Herrmann, 2004). Corporate social responsibility involves the management of the business by the company in order to produce an overall positive outcome to the society at large. The companies should consider the management quality and the quantity and nature of their outcome to society. If managed properly, CSR can assist global multinational companies achieve the aim of sustainable development. The concept of sustainable development has recently expanded to include the consideration of economic development, social equity in organizational planning and making of decisions and environmental protection. To attain this goal, many multinational companies have incorporated corporate citizenship programs into their organizational strategies in order to address the stakeholders’ social problems (Barnett & Sean, 2004). Multinational companies have placed the stakeholders’ interests at the core of their production processes. The companies also have to take into consideration the impacts their activities have on the general environment (Raiborn & Dinah, 1990). For instance, measures have to be put in place to curb pollution of all kinds, the raw materials used for production should be renewable, the industrial processes have to be environmental friendly and the company has to ensure that the final product has minimal effects to the environment. These measures are all aimed at achieving sustainable development. Conclusion In the current complex world of business, making ethical decisions is not an easy task. Several approaches have been suggested that can be applied to come up with a moral decision. In this paper, we looked at two approaches, utilitarian approach and the moral rights approach. As discussed in the paper, the best approach that can be used to attain a moral decision is the moral rights approach since it considers the means in which the decision is achieved as opposed to the utilitarian approach that looks at the outcomes exclusively. We also looked at how multinationals attain sustainable development through ensuring to the standards of corporate social responsibility. However, as an organizational leader you have to consider the available possibilities before coming up with a decision you consider is ethically correct. References Barnett, T, & Sean, V. (2004). "Issue Contingencies and Marketers' Recognition of Ethical Issues, Ethical Judgments, and Behavioral Intentions." Journal of Business Research 57: 338–346. Herrmann, K. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies. 11(2), 205-232. Linda, T., (1986). Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model, The Academy of Management Review 11, (3). Paine, L., (1994). Managing for Organizational Integrity. Harvard Business Review Raiborn, A., & Dinah P. (1990)."Corporate Codes of Conduct: A Collective Conscience and Continuum." Journal of Business Ethics 9: 879–889. Thomas M., (1991). Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. The Academy of Management Review 16, (2). Trevino, K., and Michael E. (2004)."Managing to Be Ethical: Debunking Five Business Ethics Myths." Academy of Management Executive 18: 69–81. Read More