Ethical Decision-Making Framework - Coursework Example

Running Head: [short [institute of affiliation The ethical decision-making framework includes the concepts of ethical issue intensity, Unit VI organizational factors, individual factors and opportunity. Discuss how these concepts influence the ethical decision-making process. In every decision-making process, there are inputs and systems that will play a part in order to come up with an output, or a decision. In an ethical decision-making process, what we consider inputs include the intensity of the ethical issue and opportunity. As for the system, it is the interaction of the organizational factors and individual factors that establish certain norms from which an output will be derived. The intensity of an ethical issue rests on the effect of a decision to the most number of people—or most number of stakeholders. The more stakeholders are concerned, the greater the scope which is to include the whole society, the more people to incorporate the decision which will determine its acceptability, thus determine its intensity as an ethical issue. In starting up with using an ethical decision-making framework, the stakeholders are first identified. The intensity of the ethical issue rests on the effect to most number of people, which is why it is one of the inputs to be considered. The system in which will determine the output or a decision will be determined by the interaction of the organizational factors and individual factors. For one, the individual factors will determine the values, interests and other personal factors that will influence his or her decision. Apart from these values, the context the organizational factors provide will guide as to what individual values will be acceptable in coming up with a decision. The pressure in order to conform to a higher set of values which is determined by the organizational factors will set the gears of the decision-making process. According to these larger set of values, which of an individual values is seen as more important to be emphasized and taken in consideration when coming up with a decision? The interaction of these will establish a system. The upcoming opportunity to an organization is seen to provide benefits to the organization. The opportunity is considered an input because of the benefits it can provide for the organization. With these benefits, the interests of different stakeholders will be determined, and up to what point an interest will be served by the benefit. As for the equality of the distribution of benefits to different stakeholders, this will be the result of interaction of the system. That is why, the emphasis of a certain value in order to come up with a decision has a role in relation to whose interests will be greatly promoted, which will result in an ethical and acceptable decision. 2) What are the three levels of ethical concern found in Kohlberg’s model for moral development? Please explain. What impact has Kohlberg’s model of cognitive moral development had on ethical decision making? The first level of ethical concern found in Kohlberg’s model for moral development is tells that an individual’s definition of what is right depends on his or her own immediate interests which will be determined by external rewards and punishments. In this level, if an individual sees an act to be beneficial to himself or herself, he or she will gauge the rightness of his or her decision depending on the rewards that will be reaped in relation to the decision, and punishments that will be incorporated in pursuing a decision. Thus, with great rewards that concern his or her self-interests, the individual will perceive an act to be right; with more punishments accompanying a decision, the act will be perceived to be ‘not right’, or sometimes referred to be as ‘wrong.’ In the second level, an individual defines what is right by conformity to expectations of good behavior to large societies or larger reference groups. The individual is now more aware of the immediate group or reference group in which or she belongs. Apart from deciding what is right based on the rewards or punishments he or she will receive as an individual, an individual will define what is right by what the society or this larger group establishes as what is right. In some instances, what is right is perceived to be related to rewards and punishments too, but in a ‘collective’ point of view. With this established set of good behavior an individual is expected to perform will he or she gauge whether an action is right or not right; thus, an action that is deemed to be not included in the set of good behaviors is practically seen as ‘not right’, or sometimes, ‘wrong.’ As for the third level, the individual determines what is right depending on the norms, laws, recognition of authority of groups and individuals. In the third level, an individual does not consider an action right depending solely on the rewards and punishments in relation to his or her self-interests, nor does it consider action right depending on the conformity to expectations of a larger group in which he or she belongs, but the right is established by the norms, laws and certain authorities in the society. In a certain society, there are established authorities for certain agencies such as the scientific communities that concern matters of science, the medical experts, the legal experts, and the other faculties that establish what is right for a given condition that concerns a certain act. For example, the legal system is an authority that tells what is right within the law, the scientific communities determine what is right concerning matters of science, etc. By recognizing and acknowledging these authorities as bodies that specialize in certain situations that an action has an impact, an individual incorporates these in his or her definition of what is right. Kohlberg’s model of cognitive moral development diffuses the emphasis on the realm of what to incorporate by an individual when determining what is right or not right for a decision in a more critical manner. Being critical is important, in such that it incorporates more important aspects of what is deemed right to a cognitive level, or based on reason and establishes a fair code of acceptable practices on an approach that resorts to reason—making ethics and determination of what is right for a certain situation not just a matter of agreement through conformity to established sets of behaviors of a larger group, nor based plainly on an individual’s interests. These vast differences among groups and individuals make ethical decision-making more of a blur and hard to practice, as it is seemed to be differing and existing in many points of views. Kohlberg’s model attempts to minimize the conflicts that result in these vast differences, thus encourage to look at norms, laws and authorities when determining what is right and ethical. 3) How can whistle blowing be both a positive and/ or a negative situation for many individuals? What are your personal feelings about whistle blowers? Please explain. Whistle blowing is both a positive and negative situation for many individuals in such a way that it attempts to stirs the status quo and creates transformation within the organization. As this transformation occurs, individuals perceive it in a both positive and negative light in relation to their environment and their individual position within their environment. Whistle blowing is positive in such a way that it creates pressure for transformation of culture to a more transparent environment. This environment will encourage people to speak up in order to bring to light any wrongdoing occurring in an organization in order to be acted upon. With this environment, people will feel they have more freedom, and any wrongdoing that will occur that will undermine their safety can be brought to light and acted upon, thus instilling security. Whistle blowing instills security, but it also instills insecurity in some manner, which makes whistle blowing an irony. This irony lies in the fact that whistle blowing, while a signal of transformation is also a signal of chaos which accompanies transformation. People suddenly become aware that the changes in their environment may compromise their interests and positions. Because of change and transformation, people feel anxious and stressed; change is always painful to people. That is why, while some people see whistle blowing as a positive situation, they see it as a negative one too at the same time. I personally admire whistle blowers as they have the courage to bring out the wrongdoings of people to light in order to be acted upon. However, my admiration does not take away my questions as regards the motive of the person: is it because of his or her concern for the organization, or other ulterior motives such as hidden grudge to the person involved in the wrongdoing, will he or she wants to be seen as a hero thus receive a greater reward, etc? But if we judge a person not based on his intentions but according to the effects of his or her action, whistle blowers should be commended. In the event that they compromise their position by being the ones to reveal the wrongdoing, they are vulnerable to any kinds of political assaults for destruction, thus whatever motive there is for whistle blowing, it takes a certain degree of courage to do it, as well as saving the organization as a whole for the peril. Reference List Bartol, K., Martin, D., Tein, M., & Matthews, G. (2001). Management: A Pacific Rim Focus. Australia: McGraw Hill Company. Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., Ferrell, L. (2008). Business Ethics; Ethical Decision Making And Cases, 7th ed. Houghton-Mifflin. Robbins, S. (2005). Organizational Behavior. Philippines: McGraw-Hill. Read More