Business and Society (Case Study Sample)

BUSINESS & SOCIETY (assignment): Application of ethical theory to a case study vignette. Instructions: • Choose ONE of the following four cases • Identify key stakeholders in this case. Identify and discuss main (ethical) issues of this case in relation to the stakeholders. • Evaluate the case using TWO ethical theories (you must use the theories that were taught in the lectures apart from Ethical Egoism nor Justice Ethics). • Explain how you would act / you would have acted in this situation, and why. Your word limit must not exceed 1,700 words. The essay will be marked using the following criteria: • Identification of stakeholders and issues • Outlining of main features of ethical theories and application of theories to case • Style and Presentation (including authenticity and accurate referencing) Failure to submit on time will result in a fail grade. You are required to submit your coursework both electronically through TurnItIn (see instructions in module handbook), and as hard copy to the Student Office in Block 16. Please ensure that you submit exactly the same versions of your work as hard copy and electronic copy. The electronic copy is the one that will be marked. You should also be aware that students may be asked to attend a viva should there be any doubts regarding the authenticity of their work. Case 1 About a year ago, Veronica Singh MBE, a chartered engineer by training, joined the board of Great Builds as a non-executive director. Great Builds is a FTSE 250 multi-national engineering company, specialising in designing and carrying out large infrastructure projects. A few years earlier, Great Builds hired a new CEO, Mick Handsome, in the midst of allegations of the company’s involvement in large scale bribery and a long period of weak financial performance. Mr Handsome has been very successful in turning the fortunes of the company around. He implemented an effective anti-bribery policy and thanks to his strong commitment to improving quality and service, Great Builds finds itself now in a rather robust competitive position. Mr Handsome has always been known to be a bit of a ‘ladies man’, but more recently Veronica has been hearing some rather unpleasant rumours about his personal conduct. She has heard three unrelated reports by close friends of hers who said that Mr Handsome had been behaving in an inappropriate manner toward several, especially younger, women at social functions that they attended. A tabloid newspaper also ran a story reporting on Mr Handsome attending a dubious party involving women escorts. Furthermore, during a recent visit at the company headquarters Veronica got stopped by the Head of Human Resources, who said that some female staff members have made complaints about Mr Handsome, accusing him of verbal and physical sexual harassment. What should Veronica do? Case 2 Ahmed, a University student, is working on his placement at a small marketing company GreatBrands.com. Ahmed has a formal contract of employment with the company for his placement year, and a verbal agreement was made during his interview that he respect confidentiality and that all intellectual property of the company should remain with GreatBrands.com. Ahmed has a really enjoyable time at the company and gains the trust and confidence of his colleagues. In particular, the Managing Director Michelle Jordan takes an interest in Ahmed’s learning and has talked to him about the possibility of him working for GreatBrands.com when he has graduated. As he approaches the end of his placement, Ahmed considers what his options will be for his future employment. He has enjoyed working for Michelle at GreatBrands.com, but would also like to set up his own marketing company after he has graduated. Undecided, he suggests to Michelle that he may be interested in coming back to the company but that he wants to keep his options open. Aware that setting up a customer base and purchasing the software that he will need for his own company would be time consuming and costly, Ahmed electronically copies the GreatBrands.com customer database and some of the GreatBrands.com customised software in case he sets up his own company in the future. Ahmed’s company, if it becomes established, would be a direct competitor of GreatBrands.com. How do you evaluate Ahmed’s actions? Case 3 Faruk approves leases for Riverdale Properties, a company specialising in selling and letting commercial premises. One day, Samira, a property valuer, approaches Faruk to inquire about leasing office space in one of the company’s buildings. Samira has previously rented space in one of Riverdale’s buildings, but that building has been sold; Samira needs to find new space at the end of her lease. Faruk would like to rent to Samira—she is not only an ideal tenant with an excellent credit record with the company, but Faruk knows that Samira is in the position to speak favourably to others about the company’s good service and careful maintenance of their buildings. In addition, Samira is a close family friend. Faruk has the perfect space for Samira coming available just when she needs it. The problem is rental rates have increased quite a bit since Samira signed her last lease with Riverdale, and it is more than she wants to pay. Samira asks Faruk for a break on the rent. What should Faruk do? Case 4 Sam joined Moyuka, a global car manufacturer, about a year ago to work in a team responsible for monitoring product quality of one of Moyuka’s best-selling models. Recently, Sam has received reports about a few isolated incidents involving problems with the model’s acceleration pedal, which lead the cars to speed dangerously out of control. Sam decides that this is a serious safety concern that needs urgent attention. He raises this with Kathy, his line manager, who listens carefully, takes copious notes and promises to escalate his concerns to senior management. A few days later, Sam receives a briefing from the Head of Product quality, which strongly recommends that, because there were only a few isolated incidents, that the issue be treated as a ‘quality’ and not a ‘safety’ issue. The briefing points out the high cost involved in a global product recall and its financial consequences for the company and its employees, and strongly discourages any further investigation. Sam feels uncomfortable with this but, because of his junior position, decides to let the matter drop. Has Sam done the right thing? Hi. This can be done. But I would need to know the following: 1. When is the deadline/due date? 2. What other theories that were taught in the lectures apart from Ethical Egoism nor Justice Ethics? (Ethics of Care, and Virtue Ethics.) It would have to be broken down into 3 separate assignments at$5 each: 1. Identifying key stakeholders 2. Evaluating the case using 2 ethical theories 3. Explaining how and why If you agree to the above, send (if possible)a copy of the course outline to ensure that quality and relevant done for you. Waiting to hear from you. ………………… • Home • News & Events • Conferences o o • Interviews • Publications • About • Network • Contact Carol Gilligan Carol Gilligan 21 juni, 2011. 1. Where are you working at this moment? I am a University Professor at New York University, teaching in the School of Law, the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. (Carol Gilligan on Wikipedia) 2. Can you tell us about your research and its relation to the ethics of care? My research on identity and moral development led me to identify the ethics of care as a “different voice”—a voice that joined self with relationship and reason with emotion. By transcending these binaries it shifted the paradigm of psychological and moral theory. The ethics of care starts from the premise that as humans we are inherently relational, responsive beings and the human condition is one of connectedness or interdependence. 3. How did you get involved into the ethics of care? I came to write about an ethics of care after listening to the ways in which people speak about experiences of moral conflict and choice that they face. My research focused on actual rather than hypothetical situations of moral conflict and choice and explored how people construct moral conflicts and choices, what they see as the moral problem or question, and how moral language comes into play in shaping the choices they consider and the actions they take. I was impelled to write about an ethics of care by the disparities I heard between the voice of moral theories and the voices of people on the ground. 4. How would you define ethics of care? As an ethic grounded in voice and relationships, in the importance of everyone having a voice, being listened to carefully (in their own right and on their own terms) and heard with respect. An ethics of care directs our attention to the need for responsiveness in relationships (paying attention, listening, responding) and to the costs of losing connection with oneself or with others. Its logic is inductive, contextual, psychological, rather than deductive or mathematical. 5. What is the most important thing you learned from the ethics of care? That morality is grounded in a psychological logic, reflecting the ways in which we experience ourselves in relation to others and that the origins of morality lie in human relationships as they give rise to concerns about injustice and carelessness. Studying development, I realized that concerns about oppression and concerns about abandonment are built into the human life cycle, given the differential power between children and adults and the fact that care is essential for human survival. An ethics of care speaks to these concerns. 6. Whom do you consider to be your most important teacher(s) in this area? The people who participated in my research along with great artists—playwrights, novelists and poets—who have enhanced our understanding of the human condition across cultures and time. In developing my thinking about the ethics of care, I also learned from the writings of moral philosophers, including Hannah Arendt, Simone Weil, Iris Murdoch, Suzanne Langer, Martha Nussbaum, Stanley Cavell and David Hume. 7. What works in the ethics of care do you see as the most important? Currently, the writings of Michael Slote, and the work being done in Paris by the moral philosopher Sandra Laugier and the sociologist, Patricia Paperman. 8. Which of your own books/articles should we read? Joining the Resistance (2011), especially the first and last chapters, and also In a Different Voice (1982) andThe Birth of Pleasure (2002). For the alignment of care ethics with democracy and with resistance to patriarchy, I would also recommend my 2009 book with David A. J. Richards (my NYU colleagues and a constitutional law scholar and moral philosopher): The Deepening Darkness: Patriarchy, Resistance, and Democracy’s Future (Cambridge University Press). 9. What are important issues for the ethics of care in the future? To address the question of why the ethics of care is still embattled (especially in the U.S.) but also now in Europe), to consider the ethics of care in light of new evidence in the human sciences that as humans we are by nature empathic and responsive beings, hard-wired for cooperation. Rather than asking how do we gain the capacity to care, the questions become how do we come not to care; how do we lose the capacity for empathy and mutual understanding? It is also crucial to clarify that within a patriarchal framework, the ethics of care is a “feminine” ethic, whereas within a democratic framework it is a human ethic, grounded in core democratic values: the importance of everyone having a voice and being listened to carefully and heard with respect. The premise of equal voice then allows conflicts to be addressed in relationships. Different voices then become integral to the vitality of a democratic society. A feminist ethic of care is an ethic of resistance to the injustices inherent in patriarchy (the association of care and caring with women rather than with humans, the feminization of care work, the rendering of care as subsidiary to justice—a matter of special obligations or interpersonal relationships). A feminist ethic of care guides the historic struggle to free democracy from patriarchy; it is the ethic of a democratic society, it transcends the gender binaries and hierarchies that structure patriarchal institutions and cultures. An ethics of care is key to human survival and also to the realization of a global society. 10. In Tilburg our ambition is to promote ethics of care nationally and internationally. Do you have any recommendations or wishes? Only that your efforts may flourish. Interviews http://ethicsofcare.org/interviews/carol-gilligan/ • Carol Gilligan • Chris Gastmans • Christa Schnabl • Elena Pulcini • Elisabeth Conradi • Eva Feder Kittay • Fabienne Brugère • Frits de Lange • Guillaume le Blanc • Helen Kohlen • Herman P. Meininger • Jeannette Pols • Joan Tronto • Linus Vanlaere • Margaret Urban Walker • Marian Barnes • Marian Verkerk • Maurice Hamington • Michael Slote • Per Nortvedt • Raymond de Vries • Ruth Groenhout • Selma Sevenhuijsen • Tove Pettersen • Tula Brannelly • Virginia Held Contact - Sitemap - Terms of Use Copyright 2012 - Ethicsofcare.org ………………………. HomeLog InSign Up The Ethics of Care, Virtue Ethics and the Flourishing Familymore by Kim Redgrave 1,716 Download (.docx) The_Ethics_of_Care__Virtue_Ethics_and_the_Flourishing_Family.docx 53.8 KB 1 The Ethics of Care, Virtue Ethics and the Flourishing Family For presentation at the Political Studies Association Annual Conference 2012, Belfast 3-5 April Contemporary Aristotelian Studies Panel CAS Specialist GroupKim Redgrave, PhD candidateFaculty of Law Governance and International RelationsLondon Metropolitan Universityk.redgrave@londonmet.ac.uk This is a working paper based on a draft chapter of the author’s doctoral thesis and should not beci ted or circulated without author’s permission. Abstract Carol Gilligan’s psychological moral theory popularised t he idea of a feminist ethics of care duringthe 1980s, around the same time that a renewed interest in Aristotelian virtue ethics was sparked by Alasdair MacIntyre’s After Virtue . Both care ethics and virtue ethics have been fiercely critical of contemporary liberal thinking, such as rights-based theory and the abstract universalism of Kantianism, and, in particular, the focus on the individual at the expense of relationships andcommunity. Moreover, little attention has been paid to the family by mainstream liberal theory, with the exception of David Archard’s The Family: A Liberal Defence and to some extent John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice. The key theoretical concern of this paper is how we can conceptualize a flourishing family life. This paper will argue that it is only by drawing on virtue ethics rather than contemporary liberal theory, as many care ethicists currently do, that we can properly give an account of flourishing family life. I will firstly discuss the importance of care ethics for discussion of the family. In doing so I will explore some of the tensions within care ethics on what is meant by care or care-giving and what the relevant values of care ethics are to thinking about the family. The paper will then go on to discuss how some virtue ethics can improve on the insights of care ethics to provide a philosophical account of the flourishing family. Introduction Some feminists have rejected many of the moral assumptions of liberal theory, based on abstract justice reasoning and the self-sufficient individual, and have attempted to elucidate a differenttheoretical approach derived from the traditional experiences of women and focussed on the ethicsof care. The ethics of care is now only a couple of decades old and, as such, many of its advocatesargue that it is not a fully formed moral or political theory which stands on its own. In fact, asVirginia Held points out, ‘Some advocates of the ethics of care resist generalizing this approach into something that canbe fitted into the form of a moral theory. They see it as a mosaic of insights and value the way itis sensitive to contextual nuance and particular narratives rather than making the abstract anduniversal claims of more familiar moral theories’ (Held, 2005, p. 9). Many ethics of care theorists still rely on some of the assumptions of liberal theory, such as the needfor basic social justice and human rights. However, central to the idea of an ethics of care is meetingthe needs of dependent others for whom we find ourselves responsible as parents, aunts, uncles, 2siblings, friends and human beings. Though care ethics now extends well beyond the spheres of friendship and family in its applications to law, politics, society and international relations, for thepurpose of this paper I will focus on its applications to family life. I cannot here undertake a historyof care ethics as this would be a huge task in itself. I will however try to bring out some of the coreideas and tensions within care ethics by focussing on a handful of influential theorists and bringingtheir ideas to bear on the key theoretical concern of this paper: how can we conceptualise aflourishing family life? In order to address this concern fully, I will argue that care ethics needs todraw on virtue ethics, in particular the ethics of Aristotle and the contemporary Aristotelianphilosopher, Alasdair MacIntyre. Both care ethics and virtue ethics have been fiercely critical of contemporary liberal thinking, such as rights-based theory and the abstract universalism of Kantianism, and, in particular, the focus on the individual at the expense of relationships andcommunity. Moreover, little attention has been paid to the family by mainstream liberal theory, with the exception of David Archard’s The Family: A Liberal Defence and to some extent John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice. This paper will argue that it is only by drawing on virtue ethics rather thancontemporary liberal theory, as many care ethicists currently do, that we can properly give anaccount of flourishing family life. I will firstly discuss the importance of care ethics for discussion of the family. In doing so I will explore some of the tensions within care ethics on what is meant by careor care-giving and what the relevant values of care ethics are to thinking about the family. The paperwill then go on to discuss how Aristotelian virtue ethics can improve on the insights of care ethics toprovide a philosophical account of the flourishing family. The Care Ethics of Carol Gilligan The idea of an ethics of care finds some of its origins in the moral psychology of Carol Gilligan, a former collaborator of Lawrence Kohlberg. Kohlberg’s research focussed on moral development from childhood to adulthood. However, as Gilligan points out, in the study, which he used to determine the six stages humans go through in the development of their moral judgement, women were not part of the equation. Instead he followed eighty-four boys over a period of twenty years. He then discovered that when he tried to locate women on the scale they exemplified the thirdstage of developm ent. According to Gilligan, ‘at this stage morality is conceived in interpersonalterms and goodness is equated with helping and pleasing others’ (Gilligan, 1990, p. 18). Kohlbergconsidered this concept ion of goodness to be functional in mature women’s lives and that ‘only if women enter the traditional arena of male activity will they recognize the inadequacy of this moralperspective and progress like men towards higher stages where relationships are subordinated to rules (stage four) and rules to universal principles of justice (stages five and six)’ (Ibid.). Kohlberg’s approach considers female morality to be deficient, even though his study clearly lackeduniversalisability due to its omission of girls. He does not consider the possibility that this so-calledfemale morality might be superior to male morality. Nor does he suppose that another explanationmight be that men on the whole reject the kind of morality which privileges relationships over rulesbecause they do not generally share with women in the care of dependents, and have thus adoptedthe language of rights and rule-following which dominates public life. While the experience of men isgradually changing so that there are increasing numbers of male carers and fathers who take part in their children’s care, the fact that politics, the boardrooms and even academia are still dominated by men suggests that it is still the case that most men are not involved in direct care-giving. If thedifference in moral reasoning reflects the particular experiences of men and women, then it is clear 3 that Kohlberg does not see traditional women’s work as of equal moral value to traditional men’s work. The contradiction of this claim lies at the core of care ethics.Owen Flanagan and Kathryn Jackson attempt to survey and critically evaluate the debate between Kohlberg and Gilligan. They assert that Kohlberg envisaged the morally good person as ‘simply one who reasons with, and acts on the basis of, principles o f justice as fairness’ (1987, p. 623) the core concept of John Rawls’ moral philosophy. Gilligan rejected Kohlberg’s approach to moral psychology with its exclusive focus on justice reasoning. Instead she expounded the idea that ‘*w+hereas justice as fairness involves seeing others thinly, as worthy of respect purely by virtue of common humanity, morally good caring requires seeing others thickly, as constituted by theirparticular human face, their particular psychological and social self. It also involves taking seriously, or at least being moved by, one's particular connection to the other’ (Flanagan andJackson, 1987, p. 623). According to Gilligan women tend to find their moral obligations in the needs of particular others – children, or sick or elderly relatives – for whom they are ultimately responsible (Gilligan, 1990).Lawrence Blum, defending Gilligan against Kohlbergians, states that Gilligan’s work claims empirical support for the existence of a moral outlook or orientation distinct from one based onimpartiality, impersonality, justice, formal rationality, and universal principle’ (Blum, 1988, p.472). By examining the different responses of male and female children to the moral problemsoriginally designed by Kohlberg, Gilligan concluded that women tend to develop differently frommen. She argues that women see themselves relationally, whereas men tend to see themselvesseparately, from the other. Even the moral problems themselves are designed, according to Gilligan,with this male approach to moral reasoning in mind. Thus the female response is misunderstood bythe interviewer and deemed to be a case of lower moral maturity rather than there being a problemwith what is deemed by the interviewer to be the morally mature answer. Gilligan’s studies seem to show a difference in male and female moral reasoning. What it highlightsis the disparity between the two different types of reasoning and how they might be related to howwe experience the world. Traditionally, and often still, women are the primary care-givers, not onlyin family life, but also in caring professions. The way women often experience the world then is interms of their relationship with others and in particular those closest to them, such as children andother dependent relatives or friends. Men on the other hand have traditionally, and often still,experienced the world in terms of their own individual path. While they have families, their role maybe limited to financial provider and as such they have tended to concentrate on their job and theirstatus. The realm of men for most of human history has been the so-called public sphere and so it is in terms of one individual’s claims against another that they see societal relations, particularly in a market driven, rights-based society such as the UK or USA. This distinction is a very crude one, of course, and is simply designed to illustrate the social tendency of men and women to inhabitdifferent roles which may influence their moral reasoning because of the particular standards andexpectations of those roles. Of course there will be exceptions to the generalisation; men who donot think in such individualistic terms about all of their moral relationships and women who are notprimarily responsible for care-giving because they have chosen instead to pursue a career. Again,this difference is more than likely to depend on the demands of the roles they inhabit. The pointGilligan is trying to argue is that the dominant conception of moral maturity needs to be reconceived Job Board About Press Blog Stories We're hiring engineers! FAQ Journals Terms Privacy Copyright Send us Feedback Academia © 2013 …………………… CERN Accelerating scienceSign inDirectory Home English Français Main menu Welcome Blog References Links Contact Virtue ethics and its applications Vincent Vuillemin on Mon, 05/27/2013 - 19:27 “Virtue ethics provides managers and business leaders with an opportunity to ask themselves what kind of people they become through their actions and how their decisions impact the lives of others. It gives them a chance to consider what kind of business environments and cultures they should build, how business goals, policies and procedures foster positive or negative learning in their employees and what kind of societies they contribute to developing through their operations and the products and services they offer.” (1) During our work at CERN or in our institute, we do not only produce deliverables and services, but we also develop abilities and competencies that shape our personalities. Not only do we transform the image of the Laboratory and the vision that people have about the physical world, but we also transform ourselves. In the ancient Greek philosophy, the key to existence relied on the search for excellence, which was intimately mixed with virtue ethics in order to create a society where everyone could live in happiness. Virtue ethics puts a special emphasis on the development of human values and moral character. For example, virtue ethics can provide a tool for managers and leaders to understand their attitude towards others and their decision-making. Virtue ethics, and all its applications as described in the CERN Competency Model(2), can provide everyone with a tool to sincerely understand his capacities and behavior, and improve them towards excellence. Once a disciple asked his Zen master, “What is the essence of life?” The master answered: “To do good; avoid evil!” “Oh! It is so simple that even a three-year-old child could understand it.” The master then added: “Yes, probably, but even an old man cannot practice it.” There is of course some gap between understanding virtue and good ethics or the CERN Competency Model - all of them being somehow obvious to a human being - and practicing them every day in the workplace, which requires good will, effort and awareness. This is everyone’s responsibility: the pursuit of excellence, not only technical, but also when it comes to virtue, morals, ethical decision making and respect towards all of us in the same way. Conclusion: Good ethics is part of the job for everyone! (1) “Editorial Introduction: Putting Virtues Into Practice. A Challenge for Business and Organizations”, by Joan Fontrodona, Alejo José G. Sison, Boudewijn de Bruin, in Journal of Business Ethics (2013) 113:563–565. (2) CERN Competency Model: http://cern.ch/competences. You are hereHome Who can use the Ombuds' services? What does the Ombuds do? Guiding principles CERN …………………… Virtue, Ethics and Morality in Business To understand, virtue, ethics, and morality we must first understanding there meanings. According to Boatright, “”morality and ethics are interchangeable; however, they have some subtle differences.” (Ethics and Conduct of Business, Boatright) Webster’s Dictionary describes ethics as the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation; a set or moral principles. Webster’s Dictionary describes moral as of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior; expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior; conforming to a standard of right behavior; sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment. Webster’s Dictionary describes virtue as conformity to a standard of right. Aristotle’s’ definition of virtue, which I prefer, “virtue is as character trait that manifests itself in habitual action”. Virtues are inherited traits that are practiced on a daily bases. You would not know what type of virtue a person has such as honesty by meeting them once, you would truly have to get to know that person. Knowing these definitions makes Boatright’s theory make a little more sense. To be ethical you have to have morality. Business virtues are having a sense of pride and self-respected in what you do; to make sure you can get along with others. Making a good life for yourself, family and your community should mean more than just making money. When you go to bed each night with the feeling you made a difference for the better, for that day, you should feel that you have done your job. Business Ethics can be defined as written and unwritten codes of principles and values that govern decisions and actions within a company. In the business world, the organization’s culture sets standards for determining the difference between good and bad decision making and behavior. A definition for business ethics boils down to knowing the difference between right and wrong and...