Sustainable Management Future - Dissertation Example

? SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT FUTURE: EXAM BY Sustainable Management Future: Exam Scenario Child labor is a pertinent problem in most developing countries. This vice is mostly perpetrated by large multinationals especially in farms that exploit children in search of cheap labour. The aim of using child labour is to maximize profits by taking advantage of high poverty levels in developing countries. Dagdemir and Acaroglu (2010) assert that child labour tends to reduce as a county opens up for more FDI; opening up the internal market increases per capita income in a country, which reduces cases of child labor. However, Dagdemir and Acaroglu (2010) noted that the prevalence is still high especially in large farms in developing countries. Employers exploiting children for cheap labour do not exercise virtue ethics. Virtue ethics encourage people to develop kindness and generosity. In other words, such farms instead of employing children should be kind and generous enough to fund education for such children. Rawls theory of justice requires that individuals have the rioght and capacity to reason from a universal angle, judging principles from a moral point of view. In addition, Rawls observed that there was no basis of subordinating the interests of others, calling for a more just society that treats all with fairness (Boardman & Zigmond, 2006). The implication of this requirement is that employers have an obligation to apply a moral judgment and be fair to such children. They should not subordinate the interests of children to have a good development and education by focusing on their rights to earn a profit. On the other hand, the deontological ethics is concerned with people’s actions and not effects of such actions. This means that judgments of what is good can only be inferred from judgments of what is right. This is observed in the declining numbers of child labourers in developing countries, when countries open up to the international forces and attract more FDI (Dagdemir and Acaroglu (2010). More scrutiny on an international scale opens up such vices for serious critiques and by international community and human right bodies advocating for what is right. Therefore, it is right for employers not to employ children; this promotes the good of the children. In addition, according to teleological theory, an action is good if the outcome is desirable. For example, by companies building more schools for children in such developing countries, they will help the children to improve their later lives and be more resourceful people to the companies and the society in future, which is a desirable outcome. Consequently, some companies with FDIs in developing countries have undertaken to support local education by building local schools for their workers’ children (Dagdemir and Acaroglu, 2010) Scenario 3 Integrity may be defined as the fit between course and calling. It is as a result of consistent and continuous relationship between the mission, vision, and values of an organisation and the values of an individual. Integrity is defined by individuals themselves. Integrity goes beyond ethics in that it is the characteristics that define an individual that are considerate, transparent, honest, ethical, and compassionate. Trust is critical in defining integrity; a person who does not attract trust and confidence is not regarded as trustworthy, implying their value is destroyed (Quigley, 2007). On the other hand, loyalty results from mutual relationship based on trust, fairness, and integrity, all values that define the success of a company. Loyalty refers to doing the job that one is obligated to do, and doing it to the best of one’s ability, with both elements of integrity and honesty. Therefore, Integrity complements loyalty, without which the value of loyalty loses its meaning. Sometimes, it is good to lie in business, though such lies must be ethical. Boylon (2000) explains utilitarianism theory by stating that an action can only be considered morally right when the act results in more good for the people involved. For example, in business, a client who requires their products urgently and is pressing for the same may be told that such goods would be delivered by the required date; though the company takes measures to hasten the production and delivers the goods a few hours late. In such a case, the lie would instill confidence in the client that their order would be delivered, while putting all efforts to complete it a few hours beyond the deadline due to constraints in the production process. Bothe parties will thus be satisfied as the good end will be achieved by all, though deferred for a few hours. This means such a lie may still be ethical in business due to the technical limitation challenges, which may be beyond an individual’s control. All the same, it is possible for business to be ethical by practicing honesty in all transactions. Mostly, it is difficult for a company to hold strictly to its ethical policies in business. Acting ethically poses major challenges to a company; especially to decision makers in ensuring each decision made is as ethical as possible and in accordance with the mission and vision of the company. Boeing (2012) outlines several reasons that make acting ethically a tall order in companies. One of the reasons is a close call. In any case that the decision maker in a company is has to make decisions that require strict balancing between valid and different interests, making an ethical decision becomes challenging; the competing interests may require a manager to choose an option that does not meet ethical standards. In an ethical decision making process, sometimes too many people have to give an input before a decision is made. The decision making process thus becomes too lengthy and tedious for the business. Therefore, a manger may sometimes be tempted to by-pass some decision makers especially where the decision is obvious, which may be unethical. Personal cost is another factor that makes acting ethically difficult. In some cases, the manager may realize the line of action is clear, but has to bear high costs in lost time. This makes the final decision difficult, as he has to stick to laid down procedures that lead to waste of time and unnecessary delays. In addition, some new problems in a company may require use of an approach that is not well defined within the company policies and procedures. In such a case, it becomes difficult for a company to act ethically and still solve the new problem. The above cases make it difficult to have in mind sound principles in a decision a making process. Honesty and consistency are required to ensure ethical decision making, which are hard to balance when a manger is subjected to the above factors. Scenario 4 The traditional ethics involved doctrines and philosophies of morality established during the mediaeval period. They were based on the roles and action of a Supreme Being or God (Irwin, 2007). The ethics followed the Devine theory and theory of natural Law. In this case, a manager faced with an ethical situation would be drawn towards acting naturally or in accordance to what God requires from his subjects. The natural law calls every being to choose what is good and what would promote the value of a being in accordance to divine laws. A manager has therefore to act religiously in making such decisions as outlined by philosophers such as Socrates on the duty of a being (Irwin, 2007). In the neo-traditional view of values, culture is emphasized as the main considerations in mediating tensions between ethical dilemmas and the need to have societies and organizations to have a common mutual understanding. In this case, organizations and societies have unified values. The manager in an ethical dilemma will thus make a decision that promotes the unified values of the organisation and society. For example, in case the decision involves dumping of wastes, the manager has to consider the benefits of the organization and the effects that such will have to the society, which has the same values as the organisation in question. The common value will thus ensure the manager does not act contrary to the society values. In modernity, morality and ethical problem were not any more based on a Supreme Being, but the focus was shifted to the individual self and the consequences of their actions. The manager in this case has to consider deontological and consequentialist theories in that every action that he takes will have a consequence. When in any ethical dilemma, the manager will choose a decision which promotes the good of the organization, and that which will not have any negative consequences to him as the one bearing responsibility. In postmodern view of values, a dilemma or fragmentation is accepted as part of human condition. However, in this case, there are no established truths or values (Holtzhausen & Voto, 2002). What is thought to be true is as a product of discourse emerging from both power and knowledge. The manager has to portray organizational activism in their decision making process, portraying a need to change from traditions. For example, a manager in an ethical problem will try to change from acting normally by upholding the dignity of the people involved as employees and championing for the rights of such employees. The manager will thus look beyond profits for the organization to consider the concern of all those involved, and try to resist the dominant power that may work against such involved parties. For example, if a company is making a loss, the manager will not hasten to cut wages or sack employees, but will fight to resist this by trying different methods that will ensure all parties emerge from the crisis more empowered. In pragmatic consideration of values, the inability to ground any values in overarching theories such as Marxism, Christianity, Islam, or capitalism does not prevent people from making sensible decisions for ensuring a civil and well-mannered life (Eijndhoven, n.d). Therefore, a manager faced with an ethical dilemma in this case may not base their actions in any theory or belief, but has to look into all options and choose the one that is more sensible and practical in promoting a well-mannered and civil life. In this case, a manager faced with increased operational costs in a company, will make a decision that is sensible, but still in the interests of all. Instead of sacking employees, such a manager may reduce wages, which is practical and sensible in ensuring sustainability of the company and catering for the needs of employees. List of References Boardman J, Ikkos G., & Zigmond T., 2006. Talking liberties: John Rawls's theory of justice and psychiatric practice, Journal of Continuing Professional Development, 12, 202-210. Boeing, 2012. Ethical Conduct Guidelines IL: the Boeing Company Boylan, M. 2000. Basic Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Dagdemir O., & Acaroglu H., 2010, The effects of globalization on child labor in developing countries, Business and Economic Horizons, 2(2), 37-47. Eijndhoven V.F., Business values and Ethics https://www.stress.utwente.nl/modules/databank/upload/Samenvatting%20Bedrijfsethiek1.pdf [Accessed 31st March, 2013] Holtzhausen D.R., & Voto R., Resistance from the Margins: The Postmodern Public Relations Practitioner as Organizational Activist, Journal of Public Relationships Research, 14(1), 57-84. Irwin , T., 2007 . The Development of Ethics: From Socrates to the Reformation, Oxford: Oxford University Press Quigley, J. H., 2007. Trust –An Essential Asset: Creating Individual and Corporate Value, The Raytheon Lectureship in Business Ethics. Waltham: Bentley College Read More