ETHICS/SOCIAL ISSUE 
 (Research Paper Sample)

Ethics/Social Issue:Apple Slowing Down Older iPhones Name Institutional Affiliation Course Name and Number Course Instructor Due Date Ethics/Social Issue: Apple Slowing Down Older iPhones Introduction Over the past decade, Apple’s conduct has led to numerous lawsuits due to infringement of consumer rights. The firm’s corporate strategy continues to taint the its image and reduce consumer loyalty. While Apple is known for its unique and quality products, recent practices have seen the company lose a significant market share. Apple’s conduct is a perfect example of how business ethics play a critical role in a company’s success or downfall. Primary Issue The main issue in this case study is Apple’s practice of slowing down iPhones in the name of protecting users. In 2017 the organization admitted to slowing down older phones using software upgrades (Vonk, 2018). The confession came following numerous consumer complaints regarding the performance of their Apple gadgets. The firmresponded by claiming that it was slowing the phones to address the problems of older lithium-ion batteries (Ziady, 2020). The firm argued that its practices aimed at protecting the consumers from the battery problems that led to sudden shutdowns. However, this explanation caused an uproar among the consumers and lobby groups. Many claimed that Apple’s practice went against consumer protection practices. Furthermore, the company looked to force users to upgrade their iPhones, indicating that its primary focus was profitability. Apple’s conduct led to a critical ethical controversy and numerous lawsuits since the customers felt cheated. Nielsen (2018) claims that this was not the first legal issue involving the company. The firm had faced litigations earlier due to its failure to sell replacement batteries to consumers. Engineering Dilemma The engineering dilemma, in this case, is Apple’s unethical maintenance practice. The firm faced a puzzle on the sustainability of its old products and the users’ satisfaction. To prolong the life of the old iPhones, Apple decided to slow down its processors (Pachal, 2021). The company opted to increase sustainability in the face of consumer dissatisfaction. Another dilemma was Apple’s ability to balance its product design and increase profitability. The company had the option of not tampering with the old iPhone’s design. However, it figured that users would not be prompted to buy new phones, and thus it would affect its profitability. Therefore, Apple decided to tamper with the design without the user’s consent to prompt them to upgrade their iPhones and generate revenue in the process (Pachal, 2021). In the face of these engineering dilemmas, the venture fared severely since the ripple implications had detrimental effects. The organization failed to adhere to the engineering codes of conduct fostering honesty, consumer welfare, and fair practice (Code of Ethics, 2021). Apple should have considered an option to protect its users since they are the primary stakeholders.  Implications Apple’s conduct had ripple implications for its stakeholders and especially the customers. Slowing down the old phones was met with backlash from the users, primarily due to the secretive nature of the practice (Chen, 2017). It, therefore, had adverse effects on consumer loyalty and the firm’s market share. The reduction in revenue generation affected Apple’s profitability and shareholder value leading to a sharp decline in stock prices. In addition, theemployees, especially those working at customer service desks, faced retaliation and resentment from angry customers (Chen, 2017). It adversely affected their morale, performance, and loyalty towards the company. Apple’s conduct raised questions about its secretive conduct and thus reviewed its public policy. Additionally, the controversial business practices affected Apple’s resources since it faced numerous nefarious lawsuits. Overall, nothing good came out of slowing the older iPhones; Apple lost consumer trust, investor confidence, and revenue.  Arguments Pros Cons * The arguments supporting Apple’s actions indicate that the firm's conduct resonated with its value for consumer interest. While this claim is far-fetched, it has ripple benefits for the company’s appeal to potential consumers. * The claim also aligns with the first code of engineering conduct, which emphasizes the need to augment the public’s health, safety, and welfare (Ziady, 2020). Arguing that the company was applying this ethical code would vindicate its actions and control the reputational damage. * Another notable advantage is that Apple slowed down the old phones to reduce power demands and protect the users' from sudden shutdowns due to current spikes. This explanation resonates with the engineering aspect of slowing down the older phone’s processors to protect the battery. * The firm’s actions further indicates that Apple had its consumers’ interest at heart when instigating the controversial actions. * The conduct also directly pushed customers to buy newer iPhones (Ziady, 2020). The firm focuses on middle and high-income users who can afford its premium-priced products. Therefore prompting its customers to upgrade their iPhones aligns with Apple’s profitability agenda.  * Experts argue that Apple’s conduct contradicted business and engineering ethics. The company had no right to interfere with the consumer’s product without their consent. * Regardless of whether slowing the older iPhone’s performance would benefit the customers, failing to involve them in the process was unethical (Chen, 2017). * Apple also invaded the customer’s privacy which goes against the set business standards to protect consumer rights (Juneja, n.d.). Therefore the company faces the risk of numerous lawsuits. Legal actions cost organizations time and money. * Additionally, these aspects have detrimental effects on the company’s reputation and consumer loyalty. The unethical elements and lawsuits will influence some users to switch to iPhone operating system (Ios) android.  Conclusion Apple’s activities refuted utilitarianism, Kantianism, and virtue ethics. The company acted in self-interest without considering the consequences of its actions on the stakeholders. The practice of slowing down iPhones also failed Apple’s categorical imperative as the firm used its customers for benefits only. In addition, the company failed to uphold honesty, courage, and justice in dealing with the controversy. Furthermore, Apple did not apply the fifth and sixth fundamental engineering canon. Its conduct was deceptive, dishonest, unethical, unlawful, and dishonorable.  References Chen, B. X. (2017, November 15). A new phone comes out. Yours slows down. A conspiracy? No.The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/15/technology/person...