Using the notes provided by the instructor relative to Cultural Relativism, Utilitarianism, and Consequentialism link these concepts to the way organizations operate in global environments. For example, is it proper for U.S. organizations to require compliance to U.S. laws and customs when they operate outside the U.S. or ancillary territories? Given that an organization’s highest ethical responsibility is to return to the shareholders (owners) the maximum return on their investment (in a legal / ethical manner) is there an inevitable conflict, then, with concepts of Cultural Relativism, Utilitarianism, and Consequentialism of the U.S. and other countries / cultures of the world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9boqgbmO5w
Disclaimers:
Provided are some notes for use in our class – these notes are NOT all-inclusive of ethical theory – they instead provide some basic information relative to ethical theory and application.
The opinions and examples represented are done to provide clarity and different points of view on particular situations. There will, most likely, be portions of this document that you disagree with. Keeping an open mind to the views and beliefs of others is critical in the discussion of ethics and ethical theory.
Biases exist …
We all have strong views and opinions – based, in part, on 1) our upbringing, 2) our experiences, 3) our culture, 4) our misconceptions about the accuracy of our own knowledge, 5) what we do accurately know, and 6) our propensity for achieving reward or avoiding a punishment relative to our beliefs and actions. In essence, we all have inherent biases – which may, and probably are, different than the biases of others. Finally, we (most likely) do not even know or recognize our own biases.
We tend to seek out the company of those that share our own views and opinions – as such, our view or opinion may be incorrect as the community in which we reside / live / operate may not be representative the community at large.
Just because you strongly believe something does not make it true – we have to acknowledge that the beliefs of others that conflict with our own beliefs may true. As such, we must have respect and tolerance for beliefs that conflict with our own beliefs.
Definitions:
How do we define ethics – ethics are decided by society – and enacted in their laws, regulations, cultural norms, standards of behavior, et al. Ethics have evolved over long periods of time – and reflect the beliefs of the society in which they exist. Ethics are difficult to change, even as the society itself changes. This is why a majority of the society may believe in a particular way but the morals of the society are different – it takes time (sometimes significant time) along with situational experiences to affect a change an ethic.
How do we define morals – morals are individual based – they are what we believe to be right or wrong – based upon some belief system – which may or may not agree with the ethics of the society in which we live or operate. Morals may or may not have any basis is logic or scientific data – morals may or may not exist for the sole reason that the just exist. For example, there the allowance of individuals to openly carry firearms is a legal in most of the United States but there may be a moral forming that this not proper or safe – but will take significant time to change the laws regarding carrying of firearms. Of course, there are others who believe carrying firearms is a moral right and will work so that this law does not change. Both sides have significant data to support their own points of view – and both choose, at times, to ignore the data presented by the other side.
Four Questions:
Can one be ethical and moral – This is the easiest and most pleasant experience of the four questions – if one adheres to the laws, regulations, et al of the culture and does so in a moral manner they have achieved being ethical and moral. For example, children are entitled to an education under the law – so when a child is young parents assure the child goes to school – and by doing this they achieve a moral obligation to provide the best possible opportunities for the child long term.
Can one be ethical but NOT moral – This is an example of both opinion and where morals can precede ethics. If a manufacturer discharges emission within legal limits to the environment they are acting in an ethical manner – but if we believe the legal limits are incorrect, then we infer the manufacturer is not acting in a moral manner as they should reduce emissions regardless of society requirements. However, over time society may change the law to reflect a belief in reduced emissions – the actions taken with a regard to global warming is an example of this advancement of a society moral into an ethic. As important, if the law on emissions does change this does NOT mean manufacturers in the past acted unethically – as the manufacturers were following the applicable laws of the time.
Can one be unethical and moral – Some would argue that same sex marriage, though legal in most portions of the world, is not ethical. Using the example of the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex individuals, this would be an example of an individual who acted unethical (she had a duty to perform this task as part of her job) but that she acted in a moral manner given her belief system.
Can one be unethical and NOT moral – In contrast, some would argue that same sex marriage, though legal in most portions of the world, is not ethical. Using the example of the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex individuals, this would be an example of an individual who acted unethical (she had a duty to perform this task as part of her job) and that she acted in an immoral manner from the view of those who support equal rights for all individuals and adherence to the laws of society.
The issue with being unethical – even in the view of acting in a moral manner – is that this affects the stability of the society. In some cases, this is known as civil disobedience and is very much necessary. In most cases, acting in an unethical manner is not appropriate.
Some Concepts to Consider …
We live in a global world – what happens in our community – our country – is not necessarily what is best for other communities or countries. In fact, implementing or forcing the rules of our country on another country may cause significant harm. As important, forcing adherence to standards of one country in another country may be nothing more than an intentional act to benefit ourselves over others. For example, when an organization moves jobs overseas there might be a loss of U.S. jobs – but there is also an increase of jobs in the receiving country – that might not have occurred if U.S. laws were required for another country.
It is our responsibility to understand a situation before we commit to an action – rather than trying to force change after we have entered into a situation. For example, with an overseas supplier organization we should perform due diligence to understand the rules and processes under which the supplier will operate – and decide before entering into a relationship if we are satisfied or can accept the supplier’s behaviors. It is not proper to enter into a supplier relationship and then expect changes in behaviors that were visible and apparent at the time of the initiation of the supplier relationship.
We all do not share one faith – or have a faith – so one religion does not have “lock” on how to be a good person or run a good business. In fact, most all religions agree on the core tenets of good behavior and consequential decision making (e.g. Buddhism focuses on the tenets of 1) making the proper actions, 2) with proper intention, 3) with the proper effort, 4) with the proper concentration, 5) with the proper understanding and mindfulness, and 6) with the proper communication processes). These tenets are sound from a business practice – as are the tenets of most all religions.
We must also acknowledge that religion – of any type – may not be perfect – and that religion changes with time. For example, most all religion exhibits the Abraham principle – which states that what was proper at one time in one particular situation (the sacrifice of one’s son in order to satisfy or demonstrate a commitment to a faith) would not be acceptable in today’s environment as evidenced that it has not been acceptable to require or offer a human sacrifice for a significant period of human time.
Atheists – those that do not have a spiritual faith – seek to do good without reward or from the fear of a consequence – atheists cannot be absolved of poor behavior by another – they have to be 100% accountable for their individual actions. Atheists seek to do good for the purpose of doing good – as opposed to a promise of a reward or a fear of punishment. However, those with a faith may see the lack of faith in the atheist community as a significant moral issue.
Good citizenship – An organization is a good citizen if they obey the laws and regulations of the community – they need not do any more to achieve this. An individual is also a good citizen if they obey the laws and regulations of the community – they need not do any more to achieve this. Both organizations and individuals can do more to contribute to the community – which may give them a strategic advantage – such as going beyond the requirements of the law – or voting in the individual case. In such situations, both the organization and the individual must see and realize a benefit from their strategic additional actions. Good citizenship is very close linked to corporate social responsibility.
Communities have a responsibility to be good citizens also – which means respecting the rights of businesses (and individuals) – not singling out a business (or individual) in an unfair manner – or requiring of the business (or individual) something they would not require of all. Businesses (and individuals) that are not treated properly by communities may take legal actions against the community, become involved in civil disobedience, or choose to leave the community.
Some Theories of Ethics …:
Here is a web source for some of the material below (not all) and additional information on ethical theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethical_theories (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. (Links to an external site.)
Beneficence – The principle of beneficence guides the decision maker to do what is right and good. This principle is also related to the principle of utility, which states that we should attempt to generate the largest ratio of good over evil (or wrong doing).
Least Harm – Similar to beneficence, least harm deals with situations in which no choice appears beneficial. In such cases, decision makers seek to choose to do the least harm possible and to do harm to the fewest people.
Respect for Autonomy – This principle states that decision making should focus on allowing people to be autonomous—to be able to make decisions that apply to their lives. Thus, people should have control over their lives as much as possible because they are the only people who completely understand their chosen type of lifestyle. Prostitution (legal in Nevada) and in many parts of the world (e.g. Amsterdam) are examples of this point – prostitution gives people the right to do what they want with their own bodies – which society can the regulate and tax.
Justice – The justice ethical principle states that decision makers should focus on actions that are fair to those involved. This means that ethical decisions should be consistent with the ethical theory unless extenuating circumstances that can be justified exist in the case. This also means that cases with extenuating circumstances must contain a significant and vital difference from similar cases that justify the inconsistent decision.
Deontology – The deontological class of ethical theories states that people should adhere to their obligations and duties when engaged in decision making when ethics are in play. This means that a person will follow his or her obligations to another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what is considered ethically correct. For instance, a deontologist will keep his promises and will follow the law. A person who adheres to deontological theory will produce very consistent decisions since they will be based on the individual’s set duties.
Utilitarianism (Greater Good Theory) – Utilitarian ethical theories are based on one’s ability to predict the consequences of an action. To a utilitarian, the choice that yields the greatest benefit to the most people is the one that is ethically correct. There are two types of utilitarianism – act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism subscribes precisely to the definition of utilitarianism – a person performs the acts that benefit the most people, regardless of personal feelings or the societal constraints such as laws. Rule utilitarianism considers the law and is concerned with fairness. A rule utilitarian seeks to benefit the most people but through the fairest and most just means available. Therefore, added benefits of rule utilitarianism are that it values justice and includes beneficence at the same time.
Rights – In ethical theories based on rights, the rights established by a society are protected and given the highest priority. Rights are considered to be ethically correct and valid since a large population endorses them. Individuals may also bestow rights upon others if they have the ability and resources to do so. The society has to determine what rights it wants to uphold and give to its citizens.
Virtue – The virtue ethical theory judges a person by his or her character rather than by an action that may deviate from their normal behavior. It takes the person’s morals, reputation, and motivation into account when rating an unusual and irregular behavior that is considered unethical.
Cognitive Moral Development asserts that ethics education is possible. Just as people develop mentally, physically, and emotionally, they develop a moral cognizance. Using critical thinking and decision-making tactics, people can solve their ethical dilemmas.
Subjectivism – This theory implies all decisions are subjective – and individual in nature – which also implies no decisions can be wrong.
Cultural Relativism is ethical theory this is right or wrong as a function of culture – that there is not one universal standard upon which to judge the actions of others. Culture exist as a function of many variables – e.g. faith or a lack of faith, gender, country of birth, country of residence, work type, work place, hobbies, sexual orientations, etc.
Emotive ethics incorporates expressions of emotion that are intended to alter the behavior of others or bring them on board with a certain emotion – an active sports crowd, political gathering, religious services are examples of emotive ethics
Consequentialism separates right and wrong actions by focusing on the consequences of those actions – the better of consequences the more you are required to do those actions – the worse the consequences the more you are forbidden to bring do those actions
Golden Rule Theory instructs the performance of an action that you would expect in the same or similar situation. This rule requires extreme empathy and is often biased as we may expect behavior that we would not exhibit ourselves.
Care ethics sees relationships as the primary consideration – will an action damage a relationship beyond repair is a consideration in care ethics.
Biomedical ethics is application ethical principles in the areas medicine and biotechnology – which has an inherent conflict in the premise of “doing no harm” and “healing the sick”. Medical ethics must allow people to control their own medical decisions which may include the taking of their own life – medical directives are good example of biomedical ethics implemented in society.
Ethical Dilemmas in the Future May be …:
Designing the DNA of offspring
Dealing with increased human life spans – and how we support (or do not support) this situation.
Fighting war with computers and simulations
The discovery of life on other planets – solar systems – and galaxies – and how we regulate our actions and interactions. This will also be a significant moral dilemma as the discovery of life may challenge the core tenets of religious beliefs.
Social networking and the loss of individual privacy
Summary
This post provided a very basic overview of some the concepts of ethics – and has put forth examples to illustrate the points of the document. You may not agree with all the points – the key is to seek to understand different points of view – separating moral views (which are individually and culturally valid) from ethical views (which are the social contracts populations operate under).
I hope this post helps guide as you ponder on our discussion question this week.