Ethics and Governance - Essay Example

Ethics and Governance ETHICS AND GOVERNANCE GRACE SARKAR Order No. 439822 09 May ETHICS AND GOVERNANCE How relevant to business and management is a Kantian approach to ethics? Kantian approach to ethics is vital to business and management the way air is necessary to breathe. The Kantian approach tends to keep business facing right side up at all times. This is not an easy proposition in a world where business practices often times are corrupt and coercive. The issue becomes even more problematic when survival becomes difficult without resorting to corrupt and coercive practices. Business is basically about people and the way they act and interact in the course of their duties. In these actions and interactions, means are adopted on the basis of targeted outcomes. If it becomes necessary, corporations may resort to paying bribes to receive orders. In such situations, it is difficult to resist the urge to bribe, because if I do not, someone else will. “On Kants view, what matters in evaluating an action is not the consequence, but the principle that is employed in intending or willing. Two individuals can do the same thing, but one of them do wrong and the other right, depending on what they will. Another example, I might loan my car to my neighbor in a manipulative spirit, e.g., with the thought that she will then feel indebted to me and will then agree to baby-sit my kids on Saturday; or I might loan my car to my neighbor in a generous spirit, e.g., with the thought that it will enable her to accomplish something that she wouldnt otherwise be able to, at little cost to me. Our evaluation of my action, on Kants view, will depend on the maxim of the action” (Haslanger, Prof. Sally; 2001, p2). Kantian’s approach to ethics is relevant to business and management because it focuses on the maxim of the action. To Kant’s thinking, business stands to gain when it focuses its maxim on securing goodwill. Paying bribe does not add to the goodwill of business although the practice may be universal. “A business manager who accepts Kantian morality would ask for any given decision, does the principle on which the decision is based pass the test of the categorical imperative, that is, can it be willed universally without contradiction? If it can, then the decision would be morally permissible. If it cannot, the action is morally forbidden” (Bowie, Norman E; 2002, p5). A robust business house following Kant’s approach to ethics weighs its every action in ways that secures business without depending on malpractices such as payment of bribes. Such business houses are strongly self-reliant and prefer ethically sound actions irrespective of the outcome. In Kantian ideology, there is no means. There is only the end. Actions culminate as the end. Kantian approach is flexible. It does not treat other approaches as untouchables. However, it upholds high values and sets standards that weigh individual actions by the acceptance or rejection of others universally. In commercial terms, “Ethical capital reflects the additional revenues created by corporate moral agency, such as a price premium paid by an ethical consumer for an environmentally friendly product” (Wagner-Tsukamoto, Sigmund; 2007, p6) Discuss the use of child labor in factories in developing countries from two Different ethical perspectives (you might choose for example between Virtue ethics, Kantian ethics, Rawls ‘theory of justice or utilitarianism) Virtue ethics disapproves of child labor because children must study and build their knowledge so that when they grow they are capable of choosing their career. Virtue ethics stands for virtue. There is virtue in disallowing child labor. Child labor must not be allowed to work because it is akin to exploitation. A child cannot negotiate or seek better working conditions because he is in his infancy and can only do what he is told to do (Virtue ethics). “Virtue ethics teaches that an action is only right if it is an action that a virtuous person would carry out in the same circumstances. A virtuous person is a person who acts virtuously, a person acts virtuously if they "possess and live the virtues" and a virtue is a moral characteristic that a person needs to live well” (Virtue ethics) This necessarily means that the virtuous person must be in a position where he is able to work the same way that a child does with the same amount of compensation and conditions. Basically, the virtue ethics person will not agree to work in similar conditions as child laborers. It is not possible for the virtue ethics person to perform the work of a child because the virtue ethics person is an adult with better strength and knowledge and he will demand more pay for his inputs. Unlike the child, he will not accede to do any type of work he is told to do and will only stick to his job category (Virtue ethics) Kant’s approach to child labor is different. This approach argues on the premise that most people universally are not favorably disposed to child labor. Child labor robs the child of time to study and gain knowledge for future prospects. A child is also not in a position to understand responsibility. Universally, work place demands cannot be met by a child. Kantian approach to ethics is not compatible to the idea of child labor because industries can only employ men or women who fit the job description with sufficient knowledge and experience. “Kant was interested in the rightness of an act or a decision, not in the ultimate consequences. According to Kant, a person of good will and strong character will make an ethical decision, regardless of the outcome. Kant’s approach was to identify whether or not there was a universal right or law to guide one’s course of action. One seeks to do what is right and to treat others as one would wish to be treated” (Naimi, Linda; 2007, p3). What Kant has expressed runs counter to child labor. If one seeks to do what is right, child labor is not right. If once seeks to do what is right and to treat others as one would wish to be treated, child labor is not right. A child does not belong to any commercial work place. Kant’s approach to ethics rules out child labor because the idea of child labor cannot find acceptance by others universally. A child can run errands in the family. But he has no place in commerce. Its is sometimes argued that a major flaw of utilitarianism is that it is only concerned with maximizing the total amount of good and is not concerned with the distribution of that good between people and groups. To what extent do you agree with this statement? I agree with this statement because generally once there is maximizing of good, there is no clear provision to distribute this good sufficiently to satisfy everybody. Undoubtedly, in utilitarianism, the emphasis is on maximizing total amount of good. However, there is no clear method for distribution of this good between people and groups. “Let’s start by thinking about the structure of utilitarianism. This moral theory begins by telling us what is objectively, intrinsically valuable or good, namely, utility – that is, happiness or pleasure, with details spelled out by the particular theory. It then identifies morality as the requirement that we maximize that good. Notice that the good it begins with is pre-moral in the sense that identifying it does not depend on making any prior moral assessments. This way, utilitarianism can give a powerful (and non-circular) answer to the question what is the point of morality? Utilitarians answer: to produce as much of that objective goodness as possible. And they can try to embarrass anyone who rejects such an answer by arguing that other types of moral theory would, at least sometimes, require us to act in a way that produces less overall value and is therefore less good” (Mandle, Jon; 2004). Utilitarianism’s ambiguity in clearly defining process of re-distribution leaves scope for confusion and dissatisfaction. Utilitarianism is ambiguous about re-distribution of the total amount of good. The distribution is taken care of by the top level management. There is nothing to show that the good has been equitably distributed among people and groups. Utilitarianism also recognizes different levels, that is, one level may be better than the other. In the ultimate analysis, utilitarianism is only one way of maximizing the amount of good. It does not make any provision for other issues. On the contrary, it may look down upon other types of morals. Utilitarianism may be preferred for maximizing amount of good. It has no further role. If there are other roles, these may have their own set of evaluations. Utilitarianism has no jurisdiction over them. Sources: Bowie, Norman E; 2002, A Kantian approach to business ethics, http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/content/BPL_Images/Content_store/Sample_chapter/9781405101028/001.pdf Business Ethics, An Introduction; http://www.shsu.edu/~klett/Business%20Ethics%20GBA%20ch%2040%20new.htm Deontological Ethics, 21 November 2007, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/ Haslanger, Prof. Sally; 02 December 2001, Kantian Ethics (and more on famine), http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/34900/24-00Fall-2001/NR/rdonlyres/Linguistics-and-Philosophy/24-00Problems-of-PhilosophyFall2001/2AE49424-80B9-4C52-BE69-DC6B08E59808/0/fa01lec20.pdf Kant’s Moral Philosophy, 06 April 2008, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ Mandle, Jon; 16 February 2004, Kant’s Approach to Ethics, http://crookedtimber.org/2004/02/16/kants-approach-to-ethics/ Naimi, Linda; 2007, Strategies for Teaching Research Ethics in Business, Management and Organizational Studies, http://www.ejbrm.com/vol5/v5-i1/Naimi.pdf Virtue ethics, http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/virtue.shtml#top Wagner-Tsukamoto, Sigmund; 31.01.2007, Economics and Business Ethics: A Three-Level Model of Business Ethics and Implications for the Friedman Theorem, http://www.nanzan-u.ac.jp/ISE/japanese/database/discourse/2006wagner-tsukamoto.pdf Read More