Ethical Theories

estimable Theories ETH/316 April 9, 2013 Ethical Theories Introduction Ethics is g any smudgening body of incorrupt principles, the way psyches conduct themselves with respect to the near and wrong of their indites and to the salutary and bad of any motives and ends of such modus operandiions. Ethics argon instilled in souls since they were children by p arnts, teachers, and loved cardinals. This paper will show the similarities and oddments between virtue possibility, utilitarianism, and deontological righteous philosophy. Similarities and Differences sympathy the similarities between virtue supposition, utilitarianism, and deontological moral philosophy, they first must be defined.Boylan (2009) stated, Virtue ethics is alike neartimes called agent ground or character ethics. It takes the standstill that in living your dis incarnate spirit you should try to cultivate excellence in all that you do and all that an opposite(prenominal)s do (p. 133). Individuals who judge others by his or her character preferably than his or her treats, exemplifies the virtue supposition of ethics. Utilitarianism is defined as a hypothesis that an action is chastely right when that action is for the great technical of a assort preferably than just an unmarried(a) (Boylan, 2009).Utilitarianism system is based upon creating the greatest cheeseparing for a number of nation. An individual give the bounce be over minded in parade to achieve a greater goal for all individuals use upd. Deontology ethics is a good hypothesis that suggests that an individuals craft to do a accredited task because the action, itself, is right, and not by means of any other sorts of calculationssuch as the consequences of the action (Boylan, 2009). essentially the theory suggests that individuals have a modelling obligation to preserve certain rules that ar deemed unbreakable.Virtue theory de endpointines the good and bad traits of a soulfulness over a p resbyopic period of time. Utilitarianism theory also finds the good in a soulfulness admits guidance for behavior and enables pot to know what differentiates as a good moral excerption. Deontology recommends an action based upon principle. Utilitarianism is the end justifies the remember mend deontology is the end does not justify the mean values. Virtue theory is a broad border that re tardys to the individuals character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than doing their duty or acting to bring about good choices. ain ExperienceFrom the time we are able to walk and talk we are devoted rules from our parents. Those rules are not given as punishment, precisely to guide us in life to know what is right from wrong. We are taught morality on how to act, how to dish out others, not to equivocation or be disrespectful. We are taught virtues that were instilled in our parents from their parents and passed on from generation to generation in hopes that we learn from thei r past mistakes. They place values in us that we will grow up to do the right things in life and teach others and to lead by example. ConclusionEthics is somewhatthing eachone learns from a young age and individuals either grow with it or they choose to follow another path in life that may not be as good as it should have been. Ethics is learned it is not something that is already in place. Some mountain go above and beyond, why others falter. People all have a choice in life as the path they travel imbibe. E rattling individual should instill some draw of ethics within them so the ball could be a better place to live in. Reference Boylan, M. (2009). staple fibre Ethics Basic ethics in action (2nd ed. ). Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson.Ethical TheoriesMorals define our character ethics dictate the working of a amicable system. Ethics point towards the application of morality. In the wake of this netherstanding, national, kindly and workplace ethics are based on the abstract moral codes adopted and adhered to by each member of the group. Ethics lay down a set of codes that people must follow. Ethics are copulation to peers, profession, companionship, inn and nation. Morals are and are dependent on an individuals choice or beliefs or religion and dismiss mean doing the right or wrong thing.An example to divine service you understand the difference would be Abortion is legal and at that placefore medically respectable, while some people find it in the flesh(predicate)ly immoral. Ethics can be comparatively simple to follow, while applying morals can be decidedly tougher. in that respect can be a moral dilemma, but not an honourable one. While good morals represent correct and upright conduct, ethics act more as guidelines. Ethics are applicable or adhered to by a group or association or society, whereas morals relate to individuals.As we can see from the above discussion that ethics and morals may seem similar, but are in fact rather distinc t. While morals constitute a basic human race scratch of right behavior and conduct, ethics are more like a set of guidelines that define acceptable behavior and practices for a certain group of individuals or society. Deontological theories Deontological theories are the category of normative honorable theories. It is a form of moral philosophy centered on the principles of eighteenth century philosopher Immanuel Kant. Its find comes from the Greek words Deon and logos, meaning the study of duty.Deon delegacy duty. dos are virtuously right are those in accordance with certain rules, duties, rights and maxims. Deontological theories hold that an actions tightness or wrongness depends on its conformity a certain moral norm regardless of the consequences. Actions can be virtuously permitted, required or forbidden. Consequences of the activities are not important according to deontological theory. The rear of deontology is to assess a persons character by how vigorous he or she follows moral rules, dismantle if by doing so, tragic results occur.Deontology constantly advocates the Right over the Good. The deontological model of ethics arrests the correctness of a moral action by determining if it follows moral norms. For instance, Kant gave the example that it is wrong to lie in time if it could save a persons life. The agent-centered theory of deontology accent on the duties of the moral agent (the person acting) rather than the rights of person beingness acted upon (patient centered theory). Act still if according to that maxim where by you can at the same time as an end and never entirely as a get alonger to an end.Lying is forbidden, because if lying is a public action, society would be undermined. Also it is states that peoples moral choices are inflexible by person-to-person obligation and permission. For instance, a parent is obligated to treat his or her child as more important than other people however, other adults have no obligation to treat that parents child any differently than anyone else. Since people can have personal obligations that are different from other people, they also have permission to cherish their obligations at the expense of others.In this theory, a parent has permission to save his or her own child even if it core causing negative or tragic consequences for other peoples children. The patient-centered theory that deal with rights, it means an action is wrong if it violates a persons right (life, liberty, prop/ the involvement of comfort) or against being employ only as a means for producing good consequences without ones consent. It centers on the rights of individuals rather than personal duty. It states that individuals have the right to not be used for moral good against their wills.For instance, a murderer cannot be killed without his or her permission even if it would save several lives. The Advantages of Deontological Theories Deontological morality leaves space for agents to gi ve special concern to their families, friends, and projects. At least that is so if the deontological morality contains no strong duty of ordinary generousness or, if it does, it puts a stopper on that dutys demands. Deontological morality, on that pointfore, avoids the overly demanding and excluding aspects of consequentialism and accords more with traditional notions of our moral duties.The Weakness of Deontological Theories Paradox of deontological theories We are for forbidden from violating certain duties and rights even to prevent more violations of certain duties and rights. Deontological theories have also weak spots. graduation exercise and most important of all, is the seeming ir reason of the having duties or permissions to key the world morally worse. Deontology is and will always be paradoxical, unless a nonconsequentia disceptation model of rationality is created deontologists need to defuse the model of rationality that motivates consequentialist theories.The Gol den rule is cognise as the ethic of reciprocity, this famous cross-culture maxim states Do to others as you neediness them to do to you. Humanists try to embrace the moral principle known as the Golden overtop, otherwise known as the ethic of reciprocity, which means we believe that people should aim to treat each other as they would like to be set themselves with tolerance, consideration and compassion. Humanists like the Golden Rule because of its universality, because it is derived from human feelings and possess and because it requires people to think about others and try to cipher how they strength think and feel.It is a simple and clear default smirch for moral decision-making. Sometimes people argue that the Golden Rule is defective because it makes the supposal that everyone has the same tastes and opinions and wants to be treated the same in every situation. But the Golden Rule is a general moral principle, not a hard and fast rule to be applied to every detail of life. Treating other people as we would wish to be treated ourselves does not mean making the assumption that others feel exactly as we do about everything.The treatment we all want is recognition that we are individuals, each with our own opinions and feelings and for these opinions and feelings to be afforded respect and consideration. The Golden Rule is not an injunction to impose ones will on individual else Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means nerve-racking to empathize with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatsoever we think and wherever we come from. ConsequentialismHold that this actions duty or wrongness depends on consequences it causes (happiness or pain). Consequentialist theories say that the moral justness of action can be sterilised by looking at its consequences, if the consequence s are good, the act is right. The right act produces greatest ratio of good to evil of any alternative. If the consequences are bad the act is wrong. Lying largely is bad according to ethics, but if we dont say that her disease to woman with cancer may be it will be better. Consequentialism is a moral theory, which stands under the normative ethical theories.It can be used as guidelines to enlighten on how to part moral issues. This specific moral theory focuses on the consequences of ones actions, rather than looking at the rightness and wrongness of an act. Therefore a morally right act is an act that creates a good result or consequence. According to this theory the ethically correct decision is the one that produces the scoop out consequences The end justifies the means. Consequentialists realize and accept the fact that difficult moral choices sometimes upon others. Thereby they are more flexible than duty-based theorists.It is most important to look at consequences and an alyze the results adjoin on other people. Thereby this theory is good in ethical dilemmas, because it concentrates on the impact of our behavior on others. There are cardinal types of consequentialist theories 1- expediency 2- Utilitarianism 1- Egoism It contends that an act is moral when it arouses the individuals best long term interests. If an action produces or is intended to produce of greater ratio of good to evil for the individual in the long run than any other alternative, then it is the right action to perform.Ethical egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be morally right that it maximize ones self-interest. Egoism The take up that morality coincides with the self-interest of an individual or an organization. Egoists Those who determine the moral value of an action based on the principle of personal advantage. An action is morally right if it promotes ones long-term interest. An action is morally wrong if it undermines it. There are deuce types of egoism a- Personal egoism You chase your own best interest, but dont care what others do.Personal egoists claim they should pursue their own best long-term interests, but they do not say what others should do. Personal egoists pursue their own self-interest but do not make the universal claim that all individuals should do the same. Personal Egoism is a view according to which an individual claims that he/she ought do what is in his/her long term self-interests but cannot tell others what they should do. b- inert egoism You believe everyone should be an egoist. Impersonal egoists claim that everyone should follow his or her best long-term interests.Impersonal egoists Claim that the pursuit of ones self-interest should motivate everyones behavior. Impersonal Egoism requires that each person act in his or her own self-interest regardless of the interests of others (unless it so benefits him/her). This does not prevent people cooperating with each other even when there are different self-interests. Misconceptions about egoism Egoists do only what they want, not true. Egoists dont possess virtues like honest, generosity and self-sacrifice, not true. Egoist can possess all of these virtues, as long as they reach long term self-interest.Egoism cant resolve combat of egoistic interest. Egoists only do what they like, not so. Undergoing unpleasant, even unspeakable experience meshes with egoism, provided such temporary sacrifice is necessary for the advancement of ones long-term interest. All egoists endorse hedonism (the view that only pleasure is of intrinsic value, the only good in life worth pursuing) although some egoists are hedonistic, others have a broader view of what constitutes self-interest. Egoists cannot act honestly, be clement and helpful to others, or otherwise promote others interests.Egoism, however, requires us to do some(prenominal) will best further our own interests, and doing this sometimes requires us to advance the interests of others. 2- Utilitarianism Originally formulated Jeremy Bentham in 18th century and developed by J. Stuart powder in 19th century. Greatest good is the plantation for morality. Determinations of morality are based on the application of the moral law to an action. principle of Utility or GHP (Greatest Happiness Principle) is the moral law. GHP states that an action is right in harmonize to its ability to promote pleasure/happiness.It is wrong in proportion to its ability to promote unhappiness/pain. Right action = pleasure/happiness Wrong action = unhappiness/pain According to Mill gratification depends on the attainment of pleasure, and pleasure depends on right action. Right action has to conform to the GHP. Satisfaction has to conform to the GHP. GHP is moral, greatest happiness principle refers to corporal happiness not individual happiness. Standard of morality govern human conducts. If my action conforms to the standard of morality then my action is moral.Happiness of c ommunity is more important than personal happiness. You should sacrifice your personal interest for community happiness. release is always done some end. Sacrifice for the greater good is the highest virtue. Utilitarianism is based off of the Greatest Happiness Principle which states that actions are considered moral when they promote utility(prenominal) and immoral when they promote the reverse. Utility itself is defined by Mill as happiness with the absence of pain. The main elements of this philosophy are ones actions and their resulting utility.A person is considered moral when their actions tend to promote utility of the general public in accordance with the Greatest Happiness Principle. However, just an action increasing utility does not necessarily imply a moral action. In army for the action to be moral it must be the optimal choice in increasing utility and minimizing pain. Since it is difficult to determine the superior of dickens vastly different results, Mill provide s us with a system to determine which choice would have the high quality. This system has the proper judges of the actions determine which they prefer.Whichever is preferred by a majority is considered the action with a higher quality result and thus would be more moral to perform than the action with a lower quality result. In the result of a tie, both choices are considered equally moral. The Greatest Happiness principle also allows for us to cause pain to others as long as a majority of the people becomes happier. We could essentially just steal resources from smaller strange countries and drive them to poverty as long as more people benefit than lose. Things such as slavery, bullying, rape, racism, and murder could be justified under Utilitarianism as long as the majority prefers it.Murderers could justify their action by simply cleaning all of those who opposed them. Once their numbers became the majority, murdering became justifiable as moral. Lastly, the Greatest Happiness principle eliminates the usage of the laws providedby our government. As long as the persons actions increase general utility, then it does not question how many laws are broken in the mathematical operation. We could all go rush along down roads and ignoring traffic signals/signs to our full enjoyment despite there being speed limits as long as few people cared and most people would be having a blast.Following examples are used to embellish the concept of utilitarianism. Say that one has promised to a friend to meet up at six oclock. Is it acceptable to break this promise in order to rescue someone from a burning building? Consequentialist is only concentrating on the consequence. Therefore, when looking at the result a consequentialist might say no as the consequence would be breaking a promise and in this way it could harm the friendship. On the other hand a consequentialist might say yes if the result might be saving another persons life, even though it would demand breakin g a promise.In utilitarianism it depends on the one making a decision. Therefore one could justify the killing of a homeless if his organs could be used beneficially, saving for example four other peoples lives, who have jobs and family (Frost, 2007 15). Utilitarianism has many flaws. One of the biggest problems with it is that measuring and reckon happiness among different people is impossible in practice as well as in principle. Shareholder theory It says that one and only obligation of seam is to maximize its profits while engaging stretch and free competition without fraud.According to shareowner theorists such as the Nobel winning economic expert Milton Friedman, managers should inly focus on serving the interests of the bulletproofs shareholders. Therefore pipeline executives are obligated to follow the wishes of shareholders while obeying the laws and ethical customs of society. On one hand, it is correct to say that the main focus of a business should be to make prof it. Without profit, a business cannot survive. In a way, Friedmans theory does promote social responsibility to society.The increase of profits in a gild benefits the economy which benefits the citizens of the economy. Friedman also believed that social responsibility should not be forced by the government. accountability to stakeholders can still be achieved while helping to strengthen the community. For example, companies can conduct research to provide a safer product to consumers. Shareholder Theory, on the other hand, focuses strictly on those who have a monetary share of the company. According to this view, a sozzleds only take is to serve the necessitate and interests of the companys owners.In many industries there are companies that seem to follow a stakeholder theory framework while guiding the majority of interests towards the shareholders and ultimately enforcing a shareholder theory framework. An analysis of shareholder theory applied to the oversight styles found in major league baseball has revealed such a conflict of interest. According to shareholder theorists such as the Nobel winning economist Milton Friedman, managers should only focus on serving the interests of the firms shareholders.In an article he published in the New York Times, The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits, he states, Responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance with their shareholders desires, which generally will be to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom. (Friedman, 1970) Stakeholder theory freeman who has contributed a lot to this approach, he defines stakeholders as any group or individual who can allude or is put oned by the achievement of the organization objectives.Normative stakeholder theory contains theories of how managers or stakeholders should act and should view the purpose of organization, based on some e thical principle (Friedman 2006). Another approach to the stakeholder concept is the so called descriptive stakeholder theory. This theory is concerned with how managers and stakeholders actually behave and how they view their actions and roles. Stakeholder theory is a theory of organizational management and business ethics that quotationes morals and values in managing an organization. It was originally detailed by R.Edward Freeman in the book strategical Management A Stakeholder Approach, and identifies and models the groups which are stakeholders of a corporation, and both describes and recommends methods by which management can give due regard to the interests of those groups. In short, it attempts play to address the Principle of Who or What Really Counts. 1 In the traditional view of the firm, the shareholder view, the shareholders or stockholders are the owners of the company, and the firm has a binding fiduciary duty to put their needs first, to increase value for them.How ever, stakeholder theory argues that there are other parties involved, including governmental bodies, political groups, wad neckties, trade unions, communities, financiers, suppliers, employees, and customers. Sometimes even competitors are counted as stakeholders their status being derived from their capacity to affect the firm and its other morally legitimate stakeholders. The nature of what is a stakeholder is highly repugn (Miles, 2012),2 with hundreds of definitions lasting in the academic literature (Miles, 2011). 3 The stakeholder view of dodging is an instrumental theory of the corporation, integrating both the resource-based view as well as the foodstuff-based view, and adding a socio-political level. This view of the firm is used to define the specific stakeholders of a corporation (the normative theory (Donaldson) of stakeholder identification) as well as examine the conditions under which these parties should be treated as stakeholders (the descriptive theory of stakeholder salience). These two questions make up the modern treatment of Stakeholder Theory. Who are stakeholders?A very different way of differentiating the different kinds of stakeholders is to consider groups of people who have distinctive relationships with the organization. Friedman (2006) means that there is a clear relationship between definitions of what stakeholders and identifications of who are the stakeholders. The main groups of stakeholders are * Customers * Employees * Local communities the main groups * Suppliers and distributors * shareholder * The media * The public in general * Business partners * Future generations * Past generations (founders of organizations) Academics * NGOs * Stakeholder representatives such as trade unions or trade associations of suppliers or distributers * regime, regulators, politymakers Primary a firm cannot exist without their continuing participation. Primary stakeholders allow in shareholders & investors, employees, contractors, customers & suppliers. Secondary those who influence or affect or are influenced/affected by, the corporation, but they are not occupied in transactions with the corporation or essential for its survival. Secondary stakeholders imply media, action groups, government agencies, trade unions, regulatory administration.Non-social stakeholders do not involve human relationships, which may also be divided into primary (direct) and standby (indirect), for example, natural environment, nonhuman species, future generations and their defenders in pressure groups. They are uncomplete influenced by nor a factor in the survival of the organisation (Wheeler & Sillanpaa (1998) p205, Vandekerckhove & Dentchev (2005) p222). Freeman (1984) argued that it is easy but extremely detrimental for managers to assume that stakeholders who oppose them are irrational and irrelevant.Additionally, this issue is further reinforced by arguing that there is wide variation in stakeholder claims, interests and rights (Hall & Vredenburg, 2005p11). Internal stakeholders are those in the management, merchandising experts, designers, purchasing, manufacturing, assembly and sales, while external stakeholders are the users/customers, distributors, governments, suppliers, communities, laws and regulations. Political stakeholders can be divided into 2 different sub-group national stakeholders and multinational stakeholders (Holtbrugge, Berg & Puck, 2007).National stakeholders include governmental actors such as central government, state government, local authorities and also non-governmental organizations or NGOs. On the other hand, international stakeholders are those international organizations which constituted by national government (IMF, WTO) and also NGOs (Greenpeace, international association of trade unions, international media). Both governmental actors and supranational organizations are sort out as public stakeholders while NGOs are classified as cliquish stakeholders.Hillman & Hit t (1999) proposed a typology which distinguishes between 3 different strategies of political stakeholders 1. Information strategy Seeks to affect the actions of political stakeholders by providing them specific information about preferences for policy or political positions. 2. Financial incentives strategy Aims to influence the actions of political stakeholders by dint of financial inducements which may include hiring personnel with direct political experience such as managers or consultants, providing financial support or community bribery of decision makers. . Reputation-building strategy Tries to influence political stakeholders indirectly through stakeholder support. The main instruments to achieve this goal are public relations and codes of conduct. The nous of grouping the different types of stakeholders is a noble one. It helps to improve the understanding and discretion in managing stakeholders. For this, Kolk & Pinkse (2006p62) came out with the grouping of stakehold ers into two groups, based on probable for threat and for cooperation and, based on concomitant strategies, as shown in realise 4.Briner et al (1996) indicated 4 different sets of stakeholders namely client project loss leaders organization, outside services and, invisible team members. In the compositors case of unified and business environment, Colacoglu, Lepak & Hong (2006 p211) cited that there exist three primary groups of stakeholders that preserve distinct pressures on organizations and are directly impacted by the death penalty of organizations. 1. Companies must attend to the needs of bully market stakeholders-shareholders and major suppliers of capital such as banks. 2.Companies must consider the needs and demands from product market stakeholders-the primary customers, suppliers, unions, and host communities with whom organizations conduct business 3. Companies must consider the needs of organizational stakeholders, the employees and managers within the organizatio n. IDENTIFYING The first Step in the mapping process is to understand that there is no magic list of stakeholders. The final list will depend on your business, its impacts, and your current engagement objectiveas a result it should not remain static.These lists will change as the environment around you evolves and as stakeholders themselves make decisions or change their opinions Action Brainstorm a list of stakeholders without screening, including everyone who has an interest in your objectives today and who may have one tomorrow. Where possible, identify individuals. Use the following list to help you brainstorm * Owners (e. g. Investors, shareholders, agents, analysts, and ratings agencies) * Customers (e. g. direct customers, indirect customers, and advocates) * Employees (e. g. urrent employees, potential employees, retirees, representatives, and dependents) * Industry (e. g. suppliers, competitors, industriousness associations, industry opinion leaders, and media) * Community (e. g. residents near company facilities, chambers of commerce, resident associations, schools, community organizations, and special interest groups) * Environment (e. g. nature, nonhuman species, future generations, scientists, ecologists, spiritual communities, advocates, and NGOs) * Government (e. g. public authorities, and local policymakers regulators and opinion leaders) * Civil society organizations (e. . NGOs, faith-based organizations, and labor unions) To promote important stakeholder mapping, Freeman suggests the following questions In 1984 Edward Freeman offered questions that help capture the analysis of identifying major stakeholders * Who are our current and potential stakeholders? * What are their interest/rights? * How does each stakeholder affect us? * How do we affect each stakeholder? * What assumption does our current strategy make about each important stakeholder? * What are the environmental variables that affect us and our stakeholders? How do we measure ea ch of these variables and their impact? * How do we keep score with our stakeholders? Stakeholder versus Shareholder? According to stakeholder theory, the very purpose of the firm is to serve and coordinate the interests of its various stakeholders. These stakeholders can include employees, suppliers, customers and the communities in which the firm operates. It is the moral obligation of the firms managers to maintain a balance among these interests when directing the activities of the firm. Shareholder theory, on the other hand, focuses strictly on those who have a monetary share of the company.According to this view, a firms only purpose is to serve the needs and interests of the companys owners. The in collectived Social Responsibility The way business involves the shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, governments, non-governmental organizations, international organizations and other stakeholders is usually a key features of corporate social responsibility concept. CSR involves a loading through the on-going engagement of stakeholders, the active participation of communities impacted by company activities and public reporting of company policies and performance in the economic, environmental and social arenas.Corporate social responsibility (CSR, also called corporate conscience, corporate citizenship, social performance, or sustainable responsible business/ Responsible Business)1 is a form of corporate self-regulation integrated into a business model. CSR policy functions as a built-in, self-moving mechanism whereby a business monitors and ensures its active compliance with the spirit of the law, ethical standards, and international norms.CSR is a process with the aim to embrace responsibility for the companys actions and elevate a positive impact through its activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities, stakeholders and all other members of the public sphere who may also be considered as stakeholders. The term corporate s ocial responsibility came into common use in the late 1960s and early 1970s after many multinational corporations create the term stakeholder, meaning those on whom an organizations activities have an impact. It was used to describe corporate owners beyond shareholders as a result of an influential book by R.Edward Freeman, Strategic management a stakeholder approach in 1984. 2 Proponents argue that corporations make more long term profits by operating with a perspective, while critics argue that CSR distracts from the economic role of businesses. Others argue CSR is merely window-dressing, or an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog over herculean multinational corporations. CSR is titled to aid an organizations mission as well as a guide to what the company stands for and will uphold to its consumers.Development business ethics is one of the forms of applied ethics that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that can arise in a business envi ronment. ISO 26000 is the recognized international standard for CSR. Public sector organizations (the United Nations for example) adhere to the triple dirty dog line (TBL). It is widely accepted that CSR adheres to similar principles but with no positive act of legislation. The UN has developed the Principles for Responsible Investment as guidelines for investing entities.