Are Multinational Corporations Free from Moral Obligation - Essay Example

International Corporation’s Position in Moral Obligation Insert Insert Grade Insert Morality refers to acting in ways that are considerate for the other party involved in the action. It involves a person taking full responsibility of his or her action towards another person. Moral obligation requires all the people to deal with each other while showing respect for their personal rights. This moral obligation is supposed to be extended from small groups, local organizations and even among all people in the world.

Being moral entails taking an ethical consideration regarding every event or issues that is involved in interaction of all the people. This work will critically analyze the issue of there being any ethical consideration in the working of international organizations.According to Velasquez (1992, 319), morality does not exist in international corporations. This is simply because these corporations are not subject to the law of any nation in the world. In this way, they cannot be held responsible for breaking any law.

Velasquez argues that morality is held and maintained when there is a higher authority to monitor any aspect of immorality. International corporations do, however, operate under now authority of any nation. His explanation for lack of morality is that according to Hobbsian Theory, men are likely to behave the way they want if they are not regulated. In this respect, men are likely to behave in ways that are targeting to gratify their personal interests.Velasquez argues that those international corporations that have some aspects of morality get discouraged by various issues.

One of them is that if an international corporation is working within other organizations that do not value ethical considerations, it is subjected to high competitive pressure. On another hand, any international organization that works within an environment where ethical consideration are not regarded feel guiltless when they fail to observe the morality. When an organization is working within such environment, it is considered unfair if they continue to adhere to the laws of morality, which other organizations are not following (Velasquez, 1992, 320).

Fleming (1992, 324-325), argues on a different point of view. This is by considering facts of presence of chief executive officers of organizations, managers and governments of nations in which these international corporations operate as important authority to foresee ethics. According to him, these agents have power to dictate moral and ethical considerations in any organizations. This is regarding their positions as decision makers of such organizations. Fleming argues that it would be irresponsible if unethical acts prevail in an environment where these agents are controlling the business progress.

In my analysis of the two articles, I consider the work of Velasquez convincing. Taking to consideration the environment of business, it will not be easy for any company to generalize ethics. This is considering the reason that these international corporations employ people from different countries. This means that they represent different cultures. This complicates the lives of workers where they might not be able to cope with cultures of other nations.Another reason why international corporations may continue in their current state is because of business policies.

For example, it would be too difficult for a multinational corporation to formulate policies that are different for different countries. This by itself would imply unfairness, which would translate to failure to comply with moral obligations. This way, it is justifiable to go by the arguments of Velasquez.The way of doing business in the world is the main reason why international corporations do not value moral obligations. This is because, following ethics by one company give their competitors a competitive advantage.

ReferencesFleming, J., (1992). Alternative Approach and Assumptions: Comments on Velasquez. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2, (1), 324- 327.Velasquez, M., (1992). International Business and the Common Good. Business Ethics Quarterly, 2, (1), 318-323.