Ethical Beliefs and Values - Essay Example

Ethical beliefs and values Individuals working towards a common goal for personal as well as combined benefits form s popularly called as"organizations" or "associations". These firms or companies formulating and providing a challenging and a learning working environment, also consist of moral, social as well as professional values, rules and regulations that all the employees at all levels have to abide by. This is essential for an efficient organization to remain profitable on long-term basis. For the same matter, an individual working for an organization must have the ethical and social values similar to that of the organizations in order to generate the desired result. Because if their values are incompatible, neither the organization nor the individuals working for it can benefit, paving way for the ethical issues to emerge and providing leeway for affected productivity to dominate the working set-up (Drucker: 65). The aforementioned considerations give birth to the concept of need for ethical values to be incorporated in the value system of an organization as well as to be inculcated in the personnel for the betterment of the society as a whole. Hence, the above discussion leads us to the following definitions essential to proceed our analysis based on the extensive research. However, due to the vast scope of the topic as well as for the reader's better and convenient comprehension, our research paper has been divided into six distinct parts where each section introduces a new concept and discusses a related topic in detail. All parts of the paper are further divided into sub-sections, highlighting important aspects related to the main topic. The paper begins with some of the significant definitions relevant to the gist of the topic. Part I: Ethics and organizations In order to study the cause and effect of an ethical value system of a workplace, let us first look into the lexical meanings of the terms ethics and organization and the relation between them. The dictionary defines organization as "a structure through which individuals cooperate systematically to conduct business" as well as "the administrative personnel of such a structure" (The American Heritage Dictionary: Fourth Edition). Thus, the above definition reveals two things: Firstly, an organization is a workplace where both the parties that is the employees and the employers work hand in glove to reap benefits, generate profits and form integral parts of an entire system to do business. Secondly, organization is a structure managed and organized by the administrative authority and is based on certain rules and regulations. Thus the above chain of definition leads to the following definitions of the term "ethics". Lexical meanings of ethics are many but the ones that are relevant to our research paper are briefly discussed below: Ethics are the "rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession" (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary) or ethics are defined as "a set of principles of right conduct" as well as "a theory or a system of moral values" (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary). Hence, these carefully formulated rules and policies determine "the actions or reactions of a person in response to external or internal stimuli" thereby energizing behavior of the employees and motivating them to perform accordingly (American Heritage Dictionary). Hence, all the reactions to an action as well as the rules and the policies drafted and the amendments made from time to time all form a fundamental part of the term ethics. In short, the people working for and the individuals owning a workplace form an organization where all are bound to obey the policies, rules and regulations constituting the social value system of an organization. Nonetheless, adhering to the ethical values and compelling people to do the same is not an easy job. However, the growing agitation among the employees and the continuing unrest in the corporate world reveals that organizations today world over are finding it a challenge to incorporate ethical values in their corporate culture. As communication, technology and improvement in other sectors is highly important, same is the case with the ethical values. Experts in the field come across thousands of cases related to the ethical issues with every sketching moment thereby revealing the ethical weakness of the corporate world as a single functioning body. Airline industry in the US suffered major losses when economic slowdown struck in the wake of September 11 attacks. Since then while some firms have managed to come out of the crisis, many went into oblivion and sought alliance with other airlines to strengthen their dwindling stocks. Ethical behavior becomes a major concern in such massive crisis. United States government is not only anticipating more terrorist attacks in future, it is also asking its people to pay a huge price for this fear. While the government rightly wants to beef up security in order to protect its people from terrorist activities in future, the people are unfortunately being made to pay for these governmental plans. The price tag attached with extra security measures is bringing down major airlines that were already facing a dearth of business passengers and rapid cuts in number of flights after September 11. It is important to understand that airlines industry along with the rest of travel industry has suffered immensely after September 11 but the reason why it has failed to make a decent recovery is because government is consistently levying security surcharges, which most United States airlines cannot afford. It is true that they would ultimately shift the burden of extra cost to consumers but what they fear most is that no one would be willing to buy their tickets once the price is raised even if it is as meager as $5 per round-trip ticket. We need to understand that government has been levying many types of security restriction on airlines including temporary flight restrictions, fortified cockpit door, screening of caterers, extra security at checkpoints and each one of these measures has cost airlines millions of dollars in extra cost per quarter. Airlines in the United States cannot afford this because they are already weathering economic slowdown and complete collapse of travel and tourism industry after September 11. It is believed that most airlines would have been able to make suitable recovery had it not been for all those restrictions that government and Federal Aviation authority have burdened airlines with in order to beef up security for the protection of people and homeland. For this reason let us first take a look at the condition of the airline immediately after September 11 because this will help us understand why airlines cannot afford extra surcharges even if they are to be passed on to passengers. SECURITY MEASURES AND COSTS Now that it is clear that most airlines in the country suffered badly both from terrorist attacks and poor economic recovery, it is easier to understand why any security surcharges are absolutely undesirable. A few days after the attacks, the FAA asked all airlines to spend more on security because of complaints by the general public that local airlines had been compromising on security in order to maximize profits. But to levy restriction in a time when airlines were running for chapter 11 protection was not only undesirable it was considered criminal. These security measures have been costing most airlines their recovery and business. This brings us to a very important question: why are extra security measures needed when they are turning out to be an enormous financial burden on the aviation industry This question must be answered both for the sake of maintaining coherency and for better understanding of the whole problem. When it was clear that airlines could not afford more financial burden, why would government persist in beefing up security The answer may appear simple but it has many hidden aspects too, which needed to be brought to the surface. Do we really understand why security risks were prevalent in the aviation industry of pre-September 11 days They existed not only because of careless attitude of the security personnel at airports but also because FAA was not very vigilant when it came to this issue. Many experts knew that FAA's structure was such that it did not allow for complete transparent operations or appropriate degree of accountability. When the terrorist attacks took place, people at FAA's various sections were accusing one another for loopholes in the security system. FAA was severely blamed by almost everyone from government to general public and thus it lost control of some of the essential security operations after September 11. Those operations are now under the control of newly formed Transport Security Administration. PICKEL (2001) explains where the problem lied, "The FAA's security system was set up for failure from the beginning, Hudson said. The airports, the airlines, the screening companies and the FAA are part of a four-pronged approach with "no clear lines of authority or accountability," he said. "If you look at what the four actors did after Sept. 11, they all said, 'We did nothing wrong,' and they pointed their fingers at the other actors." The FAA provides oversight but doesn't supervise the screeners or provide the security itself. That's up to subcontractors, who are paid low wages." The subcontracting work were done poorly because of the miserable wage structure but FAA failed to realize this could lead to a security breech so major that every industry in the country would have to feel the scars for a long time to come. Low wages along with an absolutely opaque structure is now being held responsible for all the security risks that exist at United States airports. Under these conditions, government had no other option but to intervene and take matters in its own hands. And when it did that, it led to an increase in security costs which will have to borne by airlines whether they approve of it or not. Several measures were taken by the government which included a security surcharge of $2.50 per round-trip ticket, extra security at checkpoint, extensive screening of baggage, expanded sky marshals plan, fortified cockpit doors, less frequent opening of cockpit doors, etc. Now that we know why exactly government had to take all these measure, we must take a look at the costs and their impact on airline business. The security surcharge is currently the most heatedly debated cost increase. The passengers are not willing to pay extra charges while airlines on their part are reluctant to bear these costs. Congress has offered bail out packages to airlines and has agreed to pay part of the total costs that airlines need to incur on further security measures, but despite this most airlines are complaining of falling revenues and annoyingly slow progress. Recovery is thus not imminent for airline industry in the United States but government maintains that security cannot be further compromised. The Washington Times (2002) reports, "Within days of the attacks, the Federal Aviation Administration required airlines to spend more money on security even as their businesses teetered on the edge of bankruptcy. Recent additions to security requirements have included hardened cockpit doors, cabin videos and transponders that allow air-traffic controllers to track airplanes with greater precision." Government with the approval of Senate has decided to bear part of the costs but that part is so small that it will provide negligible support to airlines. While Congress intends to pay for some new security measures, airlines feel that $100 million is not an adequate amount because security costs have increased manifold since September 11 attacks. 'The Washington Times' (2002) further adds, " So far, Congress has agreed to spend $100 million to help airlines pay the bill. "There's no question that our immediate costs will easily surpass $100 million, probably several hundred million," said John Heimlich, research director for the Air Transport Association, which represents major airlines. Other costs result from the $2.50 security tax on airplane tickets, free seats for sky marshals and slower flight schedules that allow time for delays caused by bag matching. New security procedures also add to what Mr. Heimlich calls "the hassle factor" for passengers. "From a demand point of view, we sell speed," he said. "That's why people fly, to get from A to B more quickly. Now it's more expensive and it's slower. That's the kind of thing that makes people think twice about their purchase." Under these conditions, airlines have no choice but to veto some of the security moves proposed Bush administration because it is felt that price increase will hurt business dramatically. There are several ways in which security is costing airlines their revenues. For example, Bush administration proposed expansion of sky marshals plan according to which airlines are required to provide free seats to 'marshals' who will protect aircraft and its passengers in case of any untoward incident. But this plan is not exactly feasible because on the one hand, hijacking is not a regular phenomenon, secondly providing free seats to marshals would means slashing the number of paying passengers. Therefore this suggestion is being viewed with skepticism, as many airlines do not agree with expansion idea. Increasing the number of sky marshals would on the one hand decrease the number of paying passengers per flight, while on the other hand it will increase the cost of maintaining expanded 'sky marshal' staff. Here it is extremely important to understand that even if Congress takes security measures on its own, the costs will ultimately be passed on to airlines that will be forced to transfer them to their passengers. This is indeed a vicious circle where any increase in security measures would result in increased costs, which will ultimately lead to decreased revenues. It was clear earlier this year that any measures taken for increased security at airports and on board will result in increased prices of round-trip tickets when government decided to levy a security surcharge. Major airlines of the country were asked to present their own estimates of how ticket prices would increase if such a surcharge were imposed. Government came to learn that a security tax would result in '$5 to $25' increase in prices depending on exact destination. And not only that, ethical issues that have surfaced over the past few years include not only the rising costs and poor subcontracting work but also privacy matters. It must be known that all major airlines are likely to share your personal information with the government in order to prevent a terrorist attack. While some people may not have a problem with their personal information being compromised, an overwhelming number of passengers felt they wouldn't want this and might consider changing airlines if they found this to be true. According to one study, it was found that: "The overwhelming worry among respondents is identity theft due to a privacy breach. The second concern is the loss of civil liberties as a result of too much sharing with government. About 22 percent of the sample claim to have been a victim of a privacy breach. In this case, a breach may have resulted in identity theft, loss of information or personal assets, excessive spamming or abusive marketing practices, stalking or other cyber crimes." (Ponemon, 2004) Keen observation and thorough analysis of the every day functioning of organizations reveal that the routine tasks have become increasingly demanding leaving either little or absolutely no time for ethical considerations. With the capitalism and materialism, taking toll, "morality appears to be so esoteric and qualitative in nature that it lacks substantive relation to objective and quantitative performance" (Ronald: 505). Though research proves with authentic evidence that for a working set-up to be efficient in terms of quality, quantity and performance, it is highly essential that it concentrate at "the moral content of organizational decision-making" (Ronald: 505). However, as a matter of fact, the cost that the integration of values involves is high but is worth the price. But it seems that the only element that remains focused and receives the greatest attention from the globally spread organizations, is the expression "change" (Ronald: 505). Hence, the changes that have already taken place in the corporate world as well as those that are next in line to be implemented are expected to bring about a drastic change in how we view the corporate environment. Hence, with the new challenging situation of ethical behavior, the world witnesses the role played by some of the organizations in codifying certain rules and regulations governing the working environment for the purpose of the promotion of ethical values and a morally uptight corporate culture. Most of such organizations place their rules under the head "Code of Ethics" or "Standards of Conducts" and think they have done their part, which is a great mistake and the bane of the society (Ronald: 505). Nonetheless, there is a possibility to find organizations that "will be concerned with aspects of ethics of greater specificity, usefulness, and consistency" (Ronald: 505). Such corporate establishments actually make it to the victory stand for they make relentless efforts and are willing to pay the price to embed ethical values in the core of their corporate culture thereby reaping benefits, discouraging unethical attitude and minimizing the possibility of any related issues to emerge. However, the number of ethically strong organizations is shamefully too low to be mentioned, the fact that has resulted in the weakening of the competing potency (Ronald: 505). This is the reason why a good few number of "executives, administrators, and social scientists see unethical behavior as a cancer working on the fabric of society in too many of today's organizations and beyond. Many are concerned that we face a crisis of ethics in the West that is undermining our competitive strength. This crisis involves business-people, government officials, customers, and employees. Especially worrisome is unethical behavior among employees at all levels of the organization" (Ronald: 505). Many studies conducted and the extensive research by some of the best experts in the related field inform us about the new challenge pertaining to the ethical behavior of the employees is being faced by not only the employers but also by the first-line supervisors. Hence from the above discussion it is evident that molding the behavior of the personnel as well as the management in accordance with the standard ethical values and legal formalities is a huge challenge faced by the organizations. However, the problem at hand would not have been aggravated had the organizations focused and comprehended the significance of ethical culture. Nonetheless, it is never too late and organizations must begin working on promoting a sound, pragmatic ethical culture in their corporations and must assist their employees as well as the supervisors in coping with ethical issues and the related situations, both nationally and internationally. In order to achieve the same, it is highly significant that organizations realize that there are certain causes for unethical behavior to nurture and flourish. Works Cited 1. Drucker P. Claremont Graduate Univ., Managing Oneself. , Harvard Business Review, 03-01-1999, pp 65. 2. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. 3. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc. 4. Ronald R. & Sims. The Challenge of Ethical Behavior in Orgnaizations. Journal of Business Ethics, July 1992. Volume 11, Issue 7, Page: 505. ISSN: 01674544 5. Brass, Daniel J.; Butterfield, Kenneth D.; Skaggs, Bruce C., Relationships and unethical behavior: a social network perspective.. Vol. 23, Academy of Management Review, 01-01-1998, pp 14(18). 6. Airlines estimate new security costs, The Washington Times, 05-21-2002 7. Terrorism takes toll on bottom line, Business costs rise with security, The Washington Times, 03-01-2002 8. MARY LOU PICKEL, AVIATION SAFETY: Are U.S. skies safe enough under FAA Sept. 11 redefining agency's mission. , The Atlanta Constitution, 10-26-2001, pp. A15. Read More