Utilitarianism, Kantian Deontology, Justice, Rights, and Normative Ethical Theories in Business - Case Study Example

Student ID number Student Name Unit name Unit number Name of lecturer/tutor Assignment name Due date Student declaration I certify that the attached assignment is my own work. Material drawn from other sources has been appropriately and fully acknowledged as to author/creator, source and other bibliographic details. Such referencing may need to meet unit-specific requirements as to format and style. Signature of student: ________________________________________ Date of submission: _______________ Outline i. Introduction ii. Utilitarianism and issues from the case iii. Kantian Deontology and issues from the case iv. Justice theory and issues from the case v. The rights theory and issues from the case vi. The normative ethical theory and related issues vii. Conclusion viii. List of references Introduction Business ethics are honorable doctrines applied in directing the behavior of a business. This process entails being able to differentiate what is wrong from right and then choosing the right. The challenge in most cases is to classify what a fine ethical practice involves. This calls on the companies to operate in a way that brings a balance between satisfactory employee treatment and competitive returns for shareholders. This should be done considering the environmental impact of its activities. The broad responsibilities bestowed on the company require an audit of its corporate social responsibility. Business ethics for companies find their foundation in the laws of nations and other international organizations. However, many companies set their own standards way above the general ethical requirements in the laws (Beauchamp & Bowie 2009. P. 57). This is especially areas that pertain to codes of behavior. Companies are helped by the organizations within their sector for instance the Association of Computer Manufacturers (ACM) formulates the ethical principles for professionals within the information and communication technology. When drawing the mandatory codes of practice, the associations consult the government, local communities or consumers of their products and services, employees, and other stakeholders within the industry. This paper analyses five ethical theories including Utilitarianism, Kantian deontology, Justice, rights and normative ethical relativism (Blowfield & Murray 2008 p.76). These theories arte analyzed in reference to an auto company case in China that saw the government and international motor manufacturing companies invest in the expansion of the motor industry in the said country. The business ethical views of this are also assessed in an effort to ascertain whether it was wrong for China to engage in vigorous expansion of its auto industry. Utilitarianism The basic principle of Utilitarianism was postulated by John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. In his description of the greatest principle of happiness, he asserts that actions are right only if they have a propensity to sponsor happiness. In the same line they are wrong for as long as they tend to promote actions that do not enhance happiness. Happiness in this perspective is pleasure and any action that reduces pain whereas unhappiness is associated with pain and lack of pleasure (Boatright 2012.P 112). The two philosophers explained that happiness is the only thing with intrinsic value. The desire to get pleasure is both an end in itself and a means to an end provided it relieves people from pain. The two English philosophers considered their classic utilitarianism as an egalitarian doctrine that holds that everyone’s happiness counts in equal measure. Utilitarianism was a brand of science of morality as it was an ethical theory attuned to science and characterized by a single law of morality with enormous power of clarification. Utilitarianism was also a form of consequentialism. The explanation given here is that determining whether action is wrong or right depends squarely on the consequences of the action. It can only be categorized as right if the outcome is the best of all its probabilities available, anything to the contrary is wrong. Good things are those that are worth pursuing and in the process striving to promote them (Boss 2011. P.43) On the other hand, the moral rightness or wrongness of the actions in question is what is termed as right. The agreement here is that actions are right when the goodness in them is exploited. Issues from the case China’s car market has been expanding rapidly for more than a decade because of three reasons. The country has been experiencing growth in its wealth and the government has been encouraging her citizens to own and drive cars in addition to the growing layer of middle class citizens yearning to be rich and as result live lavishly. The lavish life can be felt when they drive cars and feel comfortable, convenient, and enjoy the pride to own cars. Initially it would appear that such actions would be supported by the utilitarian theory. However, the stakeholders in the motor vehicle industry all through from the government, the car selling companies, and the middle class population are not making any prospects of the effects of their present actions. (Bowie 1999. P.53) The utilitarian theory holds that people must derive pleasure and in the process reduce pain but bear responsibility of the consequences of their present actions. This stands out whether the consequences are a result of acts of omission or commission. The rate of eighteen million cars in a year is already too much to cause serious effects to the environment. This is made worse by estimation that by two thousand and fifteen, three hundred million cars would be grazing Chinese roads. The negative impacts brought by increased numbers have been ignored despite the fact they may be severe. The cars emit carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide from burning fuel and incomplete combustion of the same to produce the latter (Boylan1995. P.77).The cars are also associated with increase in diseases such as lung cancer, tuberculosis, and emphysema due to the production of smog among other waste products. The happiness brought by the cars cannot be compared to the consequences of the same action. The medical costs to be incurred by both citizens and the government when the diseases will strike will heavily weigh down on the economic gains made so far. As for the citizens the comfort they are deriving now will turn to sadness as most of them will be operating between homes and hospitals. A sick nation cannot be economically productive at the same time it would be very difficult to drive the cars as the costs of fuel will soon become unaffordable. The utilitarian theory therefore asserts that any action that would ultimately cause harm must be avoided now even if the subordinate rules apply (Bredeson & Goree 2012. P. 232) In this case, the supporting rules either do not apply or are in conflict because the enthusiasm from owning cars conflicts with the health of citizens. Deontology Deontological ethics is a normative ethical stand that decides on the morality of an action following its ability to stick to the rule or set of rules. According to deontology, rules bind people to their duties. This is a theory put forward by Immanuel Kant. Kant holds that people can only act in a morally upright manner on condition that they acting from the perspective of duty (Buchholz 1993. P. 83) He further explains that rightness or wrongness is not dependant on the consequences of the actions but rather on the intent of the individual who does the action. The ethical theorist continues to illustrate that the epitome of goodness in something can only appear if the thing is good I itself and does not have to qualify. This means that it can only be good if it is intrinsically good and hence the benchmark of qualifications of goodness does not exist. Additionally, the action must never lead to an ethically worse situation. A case in question is that of a sadist who derives pleasure in other people’s suffering. Such pleasure has qualifications. In drawing his conclusion, Kant believes that nothing good exists in the world without qualifications except a good will. He submits that an individual can be said to be acting with good will if and only if his or her actions stem from the respect to moral law. Acting in respect to moral law is calling to do so. In his definition of respect, he associates it to the perception of a value which puts a stop to self-love. Kant says that sometimes actions of good will may result in harm whereas something good may arise out of a bad intention (Buchholz 1995. P.67) Kant put forward two formulations that are essential to deontology. To him, people are only expected to act to a level that such action can be universally accepted and that the said action should treat humanity well both from the actor’s and the recipient’s perspective considering the fact that it is both means to an end and end in itself. Issues from the case The expansion of the auto industry comes with clear consequences known to all the stakeholders within that industry (Carroll 2003. P.18) The concentration is however, skewed. The government is concerned with expanding the economy and in the process experiencing economic development. The motor vehicle sellers concentrate on making profits and how to out smart the competitor from the new and rapidly increasing market in China. The citizens most of them middle class citizens, derive pleasure in comfort as they pride in owning the cars (Burchell 2008. P.53). The international rules on the maintenance of the environment such as those that have been set by UNEP are clear and can be accessed any where nay time. The stakeholders have deliberately ignored because it does not scientists to tell the effects that the continued influx of cars in China will have on both people and the environment. This is a total disregard of the law and in essence contravenes the Kantian deontology theory. The imperatives that guide the theory demand that what is done must be universally accepted. It must also be done with due respect to humanity. Buying cars China stands to benefit selfish interests of the stakeholders (Collins-Chobanian 2005. P.660)The lives of people who will be affected is not considered as no strategies have been put forward to either curb the impending menace or avoid the negative effects most of which are fatal. The Justice Theory Nozick was a libertarian who favored negative rights especially pertaining to property. Together with likeminded theorists they believed in free markets and a small government. Nozick believed in laissez-faire systems irrespective of the implications. To him positive rights did not exist. In essence he did not support the existence of regulations whether from the government or industries. This theory explains that there already exist regulations by nature before the political laws imposed onto people. The natural laws cannot be violates unless in extreme circumstances which are very rare. The rights to own property are natural provided they do not conflict with other people’s rights. The theory is confined in three principles that include A person who obtains an investment in harmony with the standard of justice in a purchase is entitled to that holding. A person who gets a holding following the principle of justice in transmission, from someone else entitled to the holding, is entitled to the property. No one is entitled to a holding apart from by repeated submission of 1 or 2 Rawls was the other theorist who contributed to the theory of justice. He referred to his theory as the justice as fairness. He posits that justice is different from morality and the two cannot be joined. In drain his balance, Rawls states that there are two intuitive principles of justice in particular that hold the balance. Every individual ought to have an exact right to the most wide total scheme of equal essential liberties well-matched with a comparable system of liberty for all. Social and economic inequalities are to please two situations. First, they are to be fond of positions and offices open to all under surroundings of fair equality of chances and second, they are to be the maximum expected advantage of the least privileged in society Issues from the case These two theorists stand in support of the expansion of the motor industry in China. When Nozick supports a free market and laisser-faire, he does not consider the environmental effects of the actions (Des Jardins 2007. P. 32). The economic and health effects are also not of consequence in this case. This means that Nozick would stand in support of the expansion as he does not accept that there are positives on earth. These are similar views held by Rawls. The rights theory A rights ethical system advances its principles based on the idea that everybody has rights in life and should be treated with respect and dignity. Morality plays great tasks in this since folks have to individually apply ethical activities so as accomplish the mission without abusing people (Des Jardins 2007. P.43) This theory is often used because it does not impose its assignment, products, and structure on clients. Issues from the case The interests of the stakeholders in the expanding auto industry in China do not consider any morals. The health impacts both to the environment and people have been ignored. The right theory therefore does not blindly support this action. Normative ethical relativism Normative theory of ethics in business requires that the decisions made by individuals should enhance the well-being and in the process reduce or completely eliminate pain (Cooper 2004. P.09) Issues from the case The normative theory of morality demands that actions taken by people must be aimed at reducing pain. However, considering the long-term effects of the rapidly growing motor industry in China, due diligence is not taken (Crane & Matten 2010. P.12) Instead, the interests of the parties within the sector have taken precedence. The health of people is at the greatest risk. Conclusion It is unfortunate that the expansion of the auto industry in China was started without due consideration of the likely environmental impacts it would cause. Development of technology is a change that cannot be opposed. The government should however consider taking measures to avert a dangerous health situation that is looming. The effects the action has on the environment cannot be underrated this is bearing in mind that development cannot be stopped. List of references Beauchamp, R.T., & Bowie, N.E. 2009. Ethical Theory and Business. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River. Blowfield, M. & Murray A. 2008. Corporate Responsibility A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University press. Boatright, R.R. 2012. Ethics and the conduct of business. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. Boss, J. 2011. Ethics for Life A Text with Readings, New York Mc Graw-Hill. Bowie, N.E. 1999. Business Ethics A Kantian Perspective, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers: Boylan, M. 1995. Ethical issues in business. Texas, Harcourt Brace. Bredeson, D.A. & Goree, K. 2012. Ethics in the Workplace Ohio, Cengage. Buchholz, R.A. 1993. Principles of environmental management. New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Buchholz, R.A. 1995. Business environment and public policy, New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Burchell, J. 2008, The Corporate Social Responsibility Reader, London, Routledge Carroll, A.B, 2003, Business & society ethics and stakeholder management, Ohio, South-Western Publishing Co. Collins-Chobanian, S. 2005, Ethical Challenges to Business As Usual, New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Cooper, D.E. 2004, Ethics for Professionals in a Multicultural World, New Jersey Prentice Hall: Upper Crane, A. & Matten, D, 2010. Business Ethics, Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. Des Jardins, J.R. 2007, Business Ethics and the Environment, New Jersey, Prentice Hal. Des Jardins, J.R, 2011, An Introduction to Business Ethics, Boston McGraw-Hill. Read More