DBA 101 BUSINESS ETHICS
TITLE: DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS ETHICS
NAME: FALIQ HAZEQ BIN RAHMAT
LECTURER: V. ASOKAN
DATE: 8 JANUARY 2015
Framework for Understanding the Development of Business Ethics.
To understand more about Business Ethics, it can actually be known from many way or different perspectives. It can either be approached by a normative (what should occur) or descriptive normative (what does occur). Business ethics also has macro or societal dimension and micro or firm level considerations and managerial dimensions. The context of the matrix in Figure 1 is similar to a concept of the field of marketing by Hunt (1991).
Business Ethics Typologies
Values/ Norms & Principles For Organizational Decisions
Norms & Principles and a Fair Economic System-i.e. Distributive Justice
Codes, Standards of Conduct, & Compliance Systems for Organizations. Public policy & the Legalization of Business Ethics – i.e. U.S. Sarbannes Oxley Act, EU Privacy Laws
Actually, the scope of ethics is so broad that it affects almost decision made in social interaction. Figure 1 is an attempt to narrow and focus on our observations to typologies from an organizational perspective. Some definitions and discussion of this framework are necessary to properly interpret and provide a basic for the understanding of the historical advancements of business ethics.
Normative decisions in an organizational culture relate to what can be, that is, what a business organization ought to consider in evaluating and improving their ethical conduct (Laczniak and Murphy, 2006). Normative decisions are based on deontological and teleological norms. Deontological norms involve hyper norms and local norms described by Donaldson and Dunfee (1994) as integrative social contracts. In deontological evaluation, the decision maker evaluates the inherent rightness or wrongness of the behaviour implied by each alternative (Hunt and Vitell, 2006). Deontology assumes there is absolute fixed norm, or expected behaviour, to resolve an ethical issue. The decision is compared to predetermined norms that could relate to honesty, fairness, and trust or other norms of behaviour. Teleological decisions are based on these four elements which are 1) perceived consequences at each decision for stakeholder groups, 2) probability that the consequences will occur to each stakeholder group, 3) desirability of each consequences, and the last is 4) importance of each stakeholder group (Hunt and Vittell, 2006). Teleology is often called consequentialism because individuals using teleology are basing decisions on philosophies, such as egoism and utilitarianism. Utilitarian believed that they are achieving the greatest benefit for all those affected by a decision. Therefore, teleological decisions are based on flexible decisions based on the consequences or the benefit to history. Descriptive or positive perspective attempt to describes, explain, predict and understand business ethics activities and phenomena that actually exist (Hunt 1991). In other words, a descriptive approach to business ethics examines what actually exists, not what organizations ought to do. In an organization, a descriptive perspective would examine policies on conflicts of interest, strategies, compliance systems and various artefacts of ethical standards in the organization.
In Figure 1, micro is referred to as the business ethics conduct of individuals units (organizations, business persons or individuals, such as an entrepreneur) while macro is referred to the impact of the business decisions on the various stakeholders in the society. The impact of the aggregation of organizations or the complete system of micro decisions on stakeholders creates macro business ethics issues that are often addressed in public policy and the formal institutionalization of business ethics through government (macro/descriptive)....
Bibliography: “U.K. Consumer Watchdog Contacts, P&G, Unilver, “Wall Street Journal,April 29, 2008, p. B5.
Aristotle (2000) Politics; Nicomachean Ethics, ed. Roger Crisp, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conaboy, Richard P. (1995) “Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the Good Citizen Corporation,” in Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the ‘Good Citizenship’ Corporation (Washington, DC; US Sentencing Commission), 1-2.
“Corporate Reform Bill Passed,” CNN, July 25, 2002,
http://archives.cnm.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/07/25/corporate.reform/index.html, accessed October 16, 2007.
DeGeorge, Richard T. (1982) Business Ethics, New York: Macmillan, 5th edition.
DeGeorge, Richard T. (2007) “A History of Business Ethics,” MarkkulaCenter for Applied Ethics, www.scu.edu/ethics/practising/focusares/business/conference/presentations/business, accessed October 15, 2007.
Donaldson, Thomas and Thomas Dunfee (1994) “Toward a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory,” Academy of Management Review 19 (April), 252-84.
Farrell, O.C., John Fradrich, and Linda Ferrell (2008) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Ferrell, O.C. and Larry Gresham (1985) “A Contigency Framework for Understanding Ethical Decision Making in Marketing,” Jornal of Marketing, 49 (summer), 87-96.
Farrell, O.C. and K. Mark Weaver (1978) “Ethical Beliefs of Marketing Managers,” Journal of Marketing, 42(3), 69-73.
Hegel, Georg Willhelm Friedrich (1820) Elements of the Philosophy of Right.
Hill, Eleanor (1995) “Coordinating Enforcement Under the Department of Defense Voluntary Disclosure Profram,” in Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the ‘Good Citizenship’ Corporation (Washington, DC; US Sentencing Commission), 287-294.
Hunt, Shelby D. (1991) Modern Marketing Theory: Critical Issues in the Philosophy of Marketing Science, Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing.
Hunt, Shelby D. And Scott J. Vitell. Personal Moral Class and the Hunt-Vitell Theory of Ethics, in Business Ethics: New Challenges for Business Schools and Corporate Leaders, (2005) Ed. By Robert A. Peterson and O.C. Ferrell.
Hunt, Shelby D. And Scott J. Vitell (1986) “A General Theory of Marketing Ethics,” Journal of Macromarketing, 6 (Spring), 5-16.
Hunt, Shelby D. And Scott J. Vitell (2006) “The General Theory of Marketing Ethics: A Revision and Three Questions,” Journal of Macromarketing 26(2), 143-153.
Jones, Thomas M. (1991) “Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model,” Academy of Management Review, 16(February), 366-395.
Kant, Immanual (1899) Critique of Pure Reason.
Laczniak, Gene R. And Patrick E.Murphy (2006) “Normative perpectives for ethical and socially responsible marketing,” Journal of Macromarketing 26(2), 154-177.
Mill, John Stuart (1863) Utilitarianism.
Rawls, John (1971) a Theory of Justice, Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sharpe, Frank Chapman and Philip G. Fox (1937) Business Ethics, New York: D. Appleton Century Company.
Smith, Adam (1776) an inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth Nations: The Theory of Moral Sentuments.
Trevino, Linda K. and Katherine A. Nelson (1995) Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk About How To Do It Right. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Trevino, Linda K. (1986) “Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model,” Academy of Management Review, 11 (March), 601-617.
United States Code Service (Lawyers Edition), 18 U.S.C.S. Appendix, Sentencing Guidelines for the United States Courts (Rochester, NY: Lawyers Cooperative Publishing, 1995), sec. 8A.1.
Velasquez, Manual G. (2002) Business Ethics: Concepts amd Cases, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Yuspeh, Alan (1995) “Development of Corporate Compliance Programs: Lessons Learned from the DII Experience,” in Corporate Crime in America: Strengthening the ‘Good Citizenship’ Corporation (Washington, DC; US Sentencing Commission), 71-79.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document