Ethical Decision-Making Approaches - Essay Example

Businesses continuously in this evolving world is faced with several situations where decision making becomes a difficult proposition for the business due to the fact that the decision taken impacts different stakeholders in a different manner. The magnitude of the problem for managers intensifies when it has to be ensured that the decision taken is ethical and will look at the long term benefit of the organization. This requires that the managers look towards taking decisions based on different fundamentals and ethical decision making process and using different theories so that the business is able to gain efficiency. This paper thereby proposes to look into the ethical decision making approach for Kimberly Gas Hub so that they can go ahead with the project. While looking into the Kimberly Gas Hub stress has been laid to ensure that the decision making approach is ethical and is based on different models like Utilitarian Model, Moral Rights Model & Justice Model. Evaluating the decision making of Kimberly Gas Hub through the different models will help to understand the approach that will help the decision regarding the project to go through and will help in the overall development of the business. Ethical decision making is thereby an important phenomenon which makes businesses take decision based on it so that complete justification and justice can be done to all the stakeholders associated with the project (Frey, 2000). This essay thereby presents a thesis statement where the different models of ethical decision making are being looked into so that the best model which will help the decision related to Kimberly Gas Hub be taken. This will help the business to go ahead with the process of developing Kimberly which has a huge potential for gas and will help the future generations in ensuring proper supply of gas and will help to develop mankind. Kimberly Gas Hub is based in Kimberly as the name suggests and has an unspoiled marine and terrestrial environment which rich biological diversity, cultural richness, and scenic beauty. Developing the place and using it for gas generation will have an effect on the biological diversity and will affect some stakeholders deeply (Bird, 2006). This will also provide other stakeholders an advantage as they will be able to ensure a regular supply of gas for year to come which will help to solve the problems related to natural gas and will help the economy to move forward and grow. Using the utilitarian model which states that business should take decisions which looks towards good for most people. This model states that the business decision should be directed in a manner which ensures that the society is able to benefit from the decision and the impact of the decision does minimum harm on most stakeholders (Batson, Thompson & Chen, 2002). The Kimberly Gas Hub situation requires that a gas station is set which will ensure generation of 35 trillion cubic feet of gas. This will help the society in ensuring that the acute shortage of gas which the society is presently facing can be reduced. This will also ensure that the prices of the gas come down and the gas can be used for different purposes. This will benefit the society as the perceived value for the gas will be higher than what is actually paid for. This will ensure that the business is able to use it in delivering better products and services. On the other hand taking a decision of going ahead with the project will have another implication for the business. This will have an effect on people residing in that area as setting up the project would lead towards environmental harm. This would also mean that people residing in that area have an increased risk related to exposure from different hazards which might arise due to the process of hazardous materials that will be used in the project (Jones, 2001). The risk can be reduced to a certain extent by ensuring that steps are taken to reduce the impact on the people but will be limited to a large extent. In addition to it going ahead with the project would mean that the biological diversity, cultural richness, and scenic beauty of the place will be affected. This will also culminate to a situation where the project increases the burden on the society and thereby needs to be looked at from an angle which will help in the overall improvement of the society and decisions should be taken which will help to reduce the impact to a large extent. Looking at the decisions through the Moral Rights Model will provide a different perspective and direction to be looked at. This model states that the decision taken by the business should look at protecting the fundamental rights and privileges of people with regard to freedom, life, safety, privacy, free speech, and freedom of conscience (James, 2000). This requires that the basic ingredients and necessities which are the moral rights of the person should be preserved. This model ensures that the Kimberly Gas Hub can go ahead with their project of setting up a gas plant. This is primarily on the fact that the project doesn’t look towards absorbing the rights of other persons. Instead the project will allow the person an opportunity for advancement in carrier. This is true that while looking to go ahead with the project the safety aspect needs to be looked into. This will require proper strategies that will ensure that the fundamental rights of the person are not harmed. This will require that Kimberly Gas Hub looks at having proper facilities which ensures minimal injuries and have the required equipments and facilities to deal with those in every situation (May & Pauli, 2002). This also requires that while looking to go ahead with the project the management ensures proper rules and regulations which are abided and the rights of every individual associated with the area and project is protected. This is a fundamental requirement which every company has to ensure while looking to work on a project and the importance of this can be seen in this situation as it will require proper rules and strategies to ensure a decision which helps most (Werhane, 2009). The Justice Model for ethical decision making states that decisions should be taken which ensure that the benefits and harm is distributed evenly among the stakeholders so that no party gains at the cost of other. This requires that all the stakeholders are protected as well as provided an opportunity where the decisions taken benefit them and ensures an opportunity of growth as well (Powers & Vogel, 2010). The Kimberly Gas Hub suits the requirements as going ahead with the project would mean that the stakeholders are provided with a constant supply of gas which has been witnessing shortages. This will also help to control price rise seen in case of gas and will help the people of the place to get an opportunity to work in the project and ensure a daily source of livelihood and a chance for advancement in carrier (Batson & Thompson, 2001). In addition to it the management of Kimberly Gas Hub will look towards having proper facilities to ensure that the injuries are minimal and have the required facilities in place to treat the injured. This will thereby ensure that the benefits are spread over all the stakeholders in the most appropriate manner. On the other hand this will also lead towards some problems for the same stakeholders as looking towards Kimberly Gas Hub would mean that the rich biological diversity, cultural richness, and scenic beauty will be affected. This will raise concerns regarding the environment and will also lead towards creation of problems for the stakeholders. Since, both the benefits and the cost are spread over the same stakeholders it ensures that proper justice is done to them (Tenbrunsel & Messick, 2004). The fact that the benefits exceeds the cost for the stakeholders it will ensure that the stakeholders are able to benefit more from the project. The different theories carried out in the direction of ethical decision making regarding Kimberly Gas Hub plant project to go ahead shows different findings and areas which would make a particular decision appropriate or not. This thereby requires that the management looks to take decision based on the Justice Model. This is simply because of the fact that the model requires that the benefit and harm should be spread in an equitable manner over the stakeholders. Taking a decision based on this model ensures that the requirements are matched as it ensures that the business by taking the decision of going ahead with the project ensures that the stakeholders are benefitted through the availability of cheap gas, constant supply of gas and an employment opportunity. On the other hand it also has effect stakeholders with regard to the loss of rich biological diversity, cultural richness, and scenic beauty. On the overall basis the same stakeholders receive the benefit and the harm which is spread in an equitable manner which thereby ensures that the decision with regard to the Kimberly Gas Hub can be taken. Thus, the different model brings forward important findings and information regarding the decision pertaining to ethical decision making. The different model shows that the Kimberly Gas Hub should look towards the Justice Model while taking their decision as it will ensure that the stakeholders get the same benefits and cost which will ensure the project to pass through. This will thereby ensure that the business is able to benefit from it and will look towards the long term benefit of most involved in the society. This will thereby act as a guide and help to deliver superior performances and ensure better decision making which is ethical. References Bird, F. B. The muted conscience: Moral silence and the practice of ethics in business. (Westport, CT: Quorum, 2006) Batson, C. D., & Thompson, E. R. Why don’t moral people act morally? Motivational considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10 (2001), 54–57 Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., & Chen, H. Moral hypocrisy: Addressing some alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 (2002), 330–339. Frey, B. F. The impact of moral intensity on decision making in a business context. Journal of Business Ethics, 26 (2000), 181–195 Jones, T. M. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 15 (2001), 366–395 James, H. S. Reinforcing ethical decision-making through organizational structure. Journal of Business Ethics, 28 (2000), 43–58 May, D. R., & Pauli, K. P. The role of moral intensity in ethical decision-making: A review and investigation of moral recognition, evaluation, and intention. Business & Society, 41 (2002), 84–117 Powers, C. W., & Vogel, D. Ethics in the education of business managers. Hasting-on-Hudson, Ethics and the Life Sciences, (NY: Institute of Society, 2000) Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Messick, D. M. Ethical fading: The role of self-deception in unethical behavior. Social Justice Research, 17 (2004), 223–236. Werhane, P. Moral imagination and management decision-making. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009) Read More