LEB Chapter 36 (exam 3)
Terms in this set (47)
Ethics in business
Acting ethical on and off the clock. Businesses need to act ethically as well.
usually the minimum standard.
Ethics v Law
Ethics we tend to think are set in stone but we change them quickly.
Law is slow to change, slower than ethics.
Under the law you rarely have to sacrifice yourself, but under ethics you need to look out for the community
Doing no harm
4 components of the moral minimum
2 Assumptions of Moral Min
1) violations harm society
2) no hierarchy of human value
not Black and White. Grey area is not telling them all of the information, white lies.
is that other people will be honest with us. There is a trust and dependence component with this.
What is it based on loyalty based on?
It is_______________, you are extremely loyal to those who are loyal to you. It grows equally
Does the law require loyalty?
Loyalty is very rarely reflected in the law.
Only place requires loyalty
Keeping your promises.
We tend to _________ promise which makes us more likely to break commitments
Never promise anything (Always " I'll try to do this ...")
What's a good rule to follow with commitment?
Does the law require us to keep commitments?
_____________ law is all about two arties making commitments to each other
What kind of harm?
Mainly applies to people but technically applies to anything.
Does it matter if it's intentional or accidental?
Intentional is what we can keep.
More of the what were you thinking question.
In the law, Negligence vs Murder
The consequences may be different but the action is the same. Ethically, there is still a difference.
Does it matter if harm is intentional or accidental?
Negligence vs Murder
Yes, it severely punishes intentional harm. And helps the victim recover from accidental
Does the law require us to do no harm?
1) Meet unmet needs
2) Supplement the role of gov't
3) The Golden Rule
4) Avoid harm by omission
4 components of a higher standard
the needs required for us to thrive. I.e. education
the means of supplementing the role of government that we are okay helping
Sort of have an ____________ to helping the government.
Treat other people they way they want to be treated
Avoid Harm by ______________
Moral Reasoning & Decision-Making
1) Identify the issues
2) Which rules apply?
3) Gather facts/info.
4) Are there any excusing conditions?
5) Can you minimize conflicts?
6) Prioritize options
finding the middle ground, a great way to connect. Forces people to give up principles that don't fall in the middle category
its all relative
The Golden Rule
Don unto others as you want them to do to you
The moral minimum
Some social scientists just wanted a universal ethical standard. Universal standard is something not everyone could agree. But these four, people will generally agree no matter where you are in the world. To a certain degree, these are all reflected in the law.
Honesty, Loyalty, Keeping Commitments, Doing no harm
4 components of the moral minimum
Violating one of the four components would harm society, No hierarchy of human value
2 assumptions of the moral minimum
Is there a duty to do good? Yes. Some days have better chances to do good for society than others. It is just another option to keep a higher standard. Another theory of higher standard with 4 components.
Meet unmet needs, Supplement the role of government, the golden rule, avoid harm by omission
4 components of the higher standard
MORAL REASONING & DECISION-MAKING
• Pros to an ethical process: good in a business setting since it gets people to address ethical situations, makes people more aware of what is going on in the company, and creates more consistency.
• Cons to an ethical process: time consuming and therefore giving the situation more time to escalate; sometimes we don't know how big a dilemma is when we first see it; if people aren't into processes it is discouraging
Identify the issues
• Know that there is an issue and recognize it. A lot of time people don't realize it
until its over when they reap the consequences or guilt.
• Can't apply the process if you cannot see the issue to begin with.
Which rules apply
• Assuming that we have time to identify that there is an issue, then whose rules are
• Is it my ethical principles, the law, my employer's policies. . . ? Analyze the situation
to figure this out.
Gather facts and information
• If we go through any step-by-step process, this is the one we typically skip. The "do your homework" step.
• Gives you a 360 degree perspective of the situation, know as much as you can about the situation before you jump to conclusions.
Are there any excusing conditions
• Typically we will find something that excuses the behavior when we find additional
information in step 3.
• But if we skip step 3, we won't be aware of anything available in step 4!
Can you minimize conflict
5. For most ethical dilemma situations, there will often be multiple answers and conclusions. Pick the one that doesn't increase the drama.
• But sometimes we don't want to minimize the conflict. . . Often better to choose the one that does minimize though.
6. Often there are more options. Sit back, think about them, and rank them by the best
action plan. What are the pros and cons of each option for both me and whoever else is involved? Then, act on it!
Looking at something given its relationship to the things and circumstances around
it, not just looking at it in the grand scheme of things
Ex. Someone grew up wealthy with a bunch of nice things, then are completely cut-
off when they go to college. Then relative to their own personal experience, their new situation is painful having to get a job in college and pay for everything themselves.
Finding the common ground between things (here, we are referring to the common ground in peoples' ethics)
Ex. I am one religion, you are another. We believe in a lot of the same principles, but I feel stronger about the ones that we don't believe in. Not gonna agree then and think you are making me give up my principles in finding common ground.