The Obligation of Business Ethics - Case Study Example

BUSINESS ETHICS Business Ethics Introduction Business morality and ethics comes in two packages; as descriptive or prescriptive. Descriptive ethics refers to the how and when of making of decisions while prescritive refers to good and bad or evil. The secular ethical decisions related to business matters refer to matters of judgement. Such ethical decision are uniquely limited to different individuals and will never be the ultimate product of an organization (Trevino & Nelson, 2004). As an institution, business is therefore a moral and just like any other organization it becomes an artifact instead of a natural individual. That is why they were referred to by the Romans as personae fictae which referred to a made-up people. BB referred a firm to a judging person (Rooksby, 2002). There is need for organizations to employ moral agents (but not basically the actual individual) and be in a position to use moral reasons in making of decisions as well as in control of the cooperate actions , rules as well as policies. These are some vital abilities which are found within the organization (Elkington, 1997). Role Played by government in influencing business Ethics The classic joke regarding business ethics is the phenomenon that it has been having contradictions in some terms. This is experienced by its kind, any business organization ought to be unscrupulous and driven by the desire to succeed in its operations (Calhoun, 1999). This leaves one wondering where the room for such ethics is. The basis of these problems includes the narrowly defined zone of possible actions that need legality, but which are perceived as immoral by other individuals (Ciulla, 1998). This, for instance is witnessed where the contemporary laws allows a spectrum of the exaggerated claims experienced in advertising yet several critics have been asserting that most of these claims employed in advertising would count as lying at the same time (Lefkowitz, 2003). This brings the question of whether business organizations have the obligation of carrying the morality torch beyond the the various constraints contained in the international laws regarding businesses. There has been a general tendency in current business discussions related to business ethics which asserts that the obligation of business ethics is to keep that businesses are actually under the responsibility of morals beyond what the law demands. In contrast to this perception, the normal business has got no such obligations. The perception that business morality would be driven from the ultimate goal of profit making has been under much criticism. Many argue that this perception either confines morality to what that duration of time the business will provide or out put. In addition to this, this perception makes the assumption that consumers would have to insist on practices related to business morals (Freeman, 1999). Another major issue under criticism is the perception that there are certain business-related moral obligations which goes beyond what the law demands. This has failed since such supra-legal obligations are seen to be optional to the individual of the business. It therefore becomes unreasonable to have expectations of business performance of duties that are optional. Such business-related moral obligations are limited to the moral norms that are currently contained in the provided rules and code of ethics or in the international business laws. Such a perception has been supported by either a positivist of legality as well as the moral obligation contractarian theory (Hoffman,1990). This has also been supported by criterion of moral obligation that includes that a certain moral obligation principle ought to have endorsement by the majority within a certain cultural context. Business ethics should therefore not be seen as a independent moral principles quest but rather as part and parcel of the pre-legislative as well as pre-regulatory dialog (Sims, 2002). The matter of getting involved in deceptive advertisement as indicated above is just an instance of a legal business operation that ought to be deemed morally impermissible as per our traditional thinking. Several topics related to business ethics have been perceived as part and parcel of the bigger question of if businesses have the moral obligation that goes beyond the requirements of the law. For instance, currently the law provides that businesses have the power of accessing the medical records of several employees, their phone calls which they make using the business facilities, monitoring of their actions as well as behaviors and examining the workers of abuse of drugs. According to various philosophers, despite the legality of these business authorities, such exercises are violating human rights to privacy and are morally impermissible. Another example includes involving in environmentally damaging operations that are not regulated by the law currently (Solomon, 1999). This might include carrying out of legal business operations in such areas which are inherently racist. Others might be bluffing in labor negotiations as well as maintaining of unsafe working conditions that meet only the bare threshold legal demands. Supra-legal moral obligations also involves the obligation of various businesses to their respective workers as well as their customers. Retailers, suppliers, manufactures, subcontractors, governments, agencies meant for regulation as well as any other party who are directly or indirectly affected by such business operations might be subject to [possible immoral business operations that are legal (Francis, 2000). Various recent analysis have introduced some variables that complicate the general supra-legal moral obligations matters. For example, there is the argument that several business organizations are quasi-public institutions, thus needs to have business morals which are supposed to go beyond the private proprietorship. Subsequently the business size has a bearing on its moral obligations as the bigger ones have larger moral lives which are affected by their decisions (Nielson,1996). But businesses have the same theoretical obligation regardless of their sizes and their respective obligations (Lawton,1998). Business fraud has never been considered an ethical issue. Both the business and legal conventions see such kind of dishonesty behaviors as immoral a it is perceived to be illicit. In some times cases are made to defend the illegality of such businesses. In such cases where the technical violations which are involved appear to be minor than the possible social benefits, the illegality is seen as quite dismal in this case (Kline, 2005). In such legal matters such as those involving the violations in certain market behavior species, it is usually an implied defense, for instance in cases related to market share. There have been recent changes in the justice department in guidelines related to mergers as well as acquisitions. This is an example of some fresh administrative attitudes which have been developed towards market shares. These develops interest in ethical discussions as one tackles with such areas of borderline. A good example is when the judge involved in a case between Ford Motor company (Buchholz, 2000). The Fort was not ruled to supposedly have made indifference to the safety of the rear end of the Pinto to be a criminal negligence or even indifference. Several individuals who got the chance to hear the pinto case indicated that the organization had no morals in its actions despite the fact that its conduct was not illegal. Contrary to this, there has been no outrange of the public opinion regarding the several acts of price fixing (Robinson, 2002). For several years, various brokers involved in real estate especially in competition with each other, have been agreeing on commissions schedules. Recently, court cases have been brought to restrain such instances of price fixing (Field, 2003). But the big question under such a topic of discussion is, has the actual morality changed to any level.Popkin & Stroll (1999) say that despite the fact that the US steel corporation has been perceived by the general public as an archetypal monopolist, there has been a general disagreement of the markets as well as the courts over this matter. The general public, moral considerations and experts opinions as well as the courts holdings might all and usually differ in regard to what the propriety ought to be (George, 1999). Initially, go-between for business favors as well as giving bribes by American firms to government official wasnt considered illegal as par the countrys laws. This has been going on until the practice was exposed by the press. Revulsion of moral obligations in addition to indignation in the congress and across the government resulted to passing of an anti bribery law that meant foreign bribing by any US firms to foreign agents (Sims, 2003). However some legislators have of late been indicating a different thought pertaining this matter (Pinkus, 1999). Despite the fact that the 1992 exposure of such related scandals made by various Us organizations resulted to heavy fines, currently business people charged and convicted with bribery are seen to have acted illegally rather than immorally. It is obvious that legal and moral behaviors are not seen as identical (Lewis,1994). Actually illegal behaviors or actions are perceived as quite immoral to some observers who happen to be sensitive. An example of such instance is where college students becomes morally outraged after discovering that their college have been holding (although legally) some securities in several companies which have been investing in another country, Say South Africa or even have been making munitions (Carroll, 1991) . This creates a lot of confusion between the moral and legal acts that tends to create some of the contemporary discussions of business ethics (Williams, 1992). In evaluation of such an action, there might be an implied double jeopardy as being illegal and immoral (Gilbert,1996). In reality, such an action might be both illegal and immoral but some operational legal system have the obligation of making the charge of immorality unwanted (Schwartz & Carroll, 2003). Conspiracy, is basically illegal and has for long been regarded as immoral by a lot of people. But several mergers have been demanding a case-by- case analysis in order to evaluate the legality as well as morality of such. According to Scholte (2000) the aim of a company is to influence the economic status of the stakeholders within the conventional and legal restraints. This has not been seen to be quite useful guide (Chryssides & Kaler, 1994). Generally firms ought to be profitable for them to thrive. In some cases the law allows practices which are social questionable (Frederick,1990). In such cases the organizations tends to act immorally for them to make high profits (Donaldson,1994). But the question under such situations is whether the court should permit operations, in spite of being legal, would allow industrial accidents to take place or that which do not sufficiently ensure a health quality of the products and services they are sending to the market (Hart & Milstein, 2003). From time to time, should morality, which is an extralegal evaluation not happen to be an implicit guide ? It becomes socially dysfunctional when the position that obedience to the law is all what is expected of an organization in such a universe where the firms managers possess at their disposal the skills which allows them to examine the meaning of the laws and the subsequent rules that they are supposed to obey or follow (Peter, 1992). Thus, morally starts by going beyond the provisions of the law requirements although might be risky sometimes. In South Africa, for instance it was illegal for companys’ management to direct their organizations o treat black Africans on as par with the white people, even though it is moral to act so (Crane & Matten, 2007). On the other hand, in some countries such as the USA, it would be more moral to hire some people to work in the organization even if they have low productivity at much low wages instead of just being jobless in spite of it being illegal. This brings about a dichotomy between profit-making and morality, but there is cost which must be involved in the moral issues (Schminke,1998). This might be in terms of effort, money, risk or even income foregone. Recognizing income to be bought, but expected molarity to be the most precious thing to be costless would be totally strange (Atkinson,1997). Business is a mystical body of organizations or corporate systems. It has got no head which is visible but but has several managers and leaders. They are bound by various constraints and restraints (Dicken, (2007). Certain actions with business ethics are evaluated against the yardstick of such righteousness that is evaluated by the law but sometimes expressed in values that permeate the community as well as the market place. Harrison, Newholm & Shaw (2005) hold that despite the fact that the moral decisions are hard to explain how they are made, accountability and responsibility of such decisions can not be passed to the business but are part and parcel of judgment. References Atkinson, C. 1997. Women, Ethics and the Workplace. London: Praeger. Buchholz, R. 2000. Rethinking Business ethics: a Pragmatic approach. Oxford University Press. Carroll, A. (1991) The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders: Business Horizons, Vol. 34, issue 4, pages 39-49 Calhoun, C. 1999. Ethics and the CPA: Building trust and value-Added services. London: Wiley. Ciulla, J. 1998. Ethics: The heart of Leadership. London: Praeger. Crane, A & Matten D. (2007). Business Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press Chryssides, D & Kaler J, (1994) Introduction to Business Ethics. London: Chapman Hall. Dicken, P. (2007). Global Shift; Mapping the Changing Contours of the World Economy. London: SAGE Donaldson, T. 1994. Business as a Humanity: Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elkington, J. (1997) Cannibals with Forks, the Triple Bottom Line in the 21st Century. New York: Capstone Field, J. (2003) Social Capital. London: Routledge Francis, R. 2000. Ethics and Corporate Governance: An Australian Handbook. Wales. University of New South wales Press. Frederick, R. 1990. Business, Ethics and the Environment: the Public Policy Debate. London: Quarum Books. Freeman, E. 1999. The ethics of Accounting and Finance: Trust, responsibility and Control. London; Quarum. George, R.T (1999) Business Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Gilbert, D. 1996. Ethics Through Corporate Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press Harrison, R., Newholm, T., and Shaw., D. (2005) The Ethical Consumer. London: Sage Publications Hart, S.L. & Milstein, M.B. (2003). Creating Sustainable Value :Academy of Management Executive. London: John Wiley & Sons Henriques, A. & Richardson, J. (2004) The Triple Bottom Line: Does it all Add up. London: Earthscan Hoffman, M. 1990. The Corporate, Ethics and the Environment. London: Quarum Books. Lawton, A. (1998) Ethical Management For International Business. London: Open University Press Lewis, A. 1994. Ethics and Economic Affairs. London: Roultledge. Lefkowitz, J. 2003. Ethics and values in industrial_organization Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press Kline, J. 2005. Ethics for International Business: Decison making in a global Political Economy. London: Roultledge. Nielson, R. 1996. The politics of Ethics: Methods for Acting, Learning and Sometimes fighting with Others in Addressing Ethics Problems In Organizational Life. Oxford: Oxfrod University Press. Peter, F. (1992) Great Traditions In Ethics. California: New York: Wadsworth Pinkus, L. 1999. An Ethics Casebook for Hospitals: Practical Approaches fo everyday Cases. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. Popkin R.H. & Stroll, A. (1999) Philosophy, 3rd edition. New York: Made simple books Robinson, S. 2002. Case histories in Business ethics. London: Roultledge Scholte, J.A. (2000) Globalisation: a Critical Introduction. London: Palgrave, Rooksby, E. 2002. E-mail and ethics: Style and ethical Relations in computer-Mediated Communication. London: Roultledge. Schwartz, M.S., and Carroll, A.B. (2003) Corporate Social Responsibility: A three Domain Approach, Business Ethics Quarterly, 13/4, pages 503-530 Schminke, M. (1998). Managerial ethics: Moral Management of People and processes.Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sims, R. 2003. Ethics and Corporate Responsibilities. Why Giants fall. London: Praeger. Sims, R. 2002. Teaching business ethics for Effective learning. London: Quarum Books Sims, R. 2004. Ethics and Organizational Decision Making; A call for Renewal. London: Quarum Books Solomon, R. 1999. A Better way to think about Business: How Personal Intergrity Leads to Corporate Sucess. Trevino, K & Nelson, A. (2004) Managing Business Ethics. London: John Wiley & Sons Williams., G. 1992. Ethics in mordern Management. London: Quarum Books. http://www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/vita/research/business.htm [Accessed March, 21, 2010] http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+moral+argument+for+sustainability+&+green+practice s.-a0178754505 Read More