Lecture Notes

Chapter 1
 Ethical Perspectives
Organizational Ethics: A Practical Approach 

Utilitarianism
“Do the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number”
•	Theorists:  Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
•	Premise: make decisions based on their outcomes or consequences (consequentialism)
•	The best decisions
•	--generate the most benefits relative to their disadvantages
•	--benefit the largest number of people 

Utilitarianism: Evaluation
•	Strengths
•	Promotes human welfare
•	Commonly used
•	Appropriate for policy decisions and emergency situations
•	Weaknesses
•	Hard to define and measure the “greatest good.”
•	Hard to identify all possible consequences of a choice
•	We favor short term consequences and personal interests when making choices
•	Overlooks the needs of the individual

Kant’s Categorical Imperative
“Do What’s Right Despite the Consequences”
•	Theorist: Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
•	Premise:  do your duty (deontological)
•	Categorical Imperative:  to determine if a behavior is moral, decide if it should be universally followed, without exception
•	Treat “humanity as an end” (respect for persons)

Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Evaluation
Strengths
Prevents unethical behavior
Builds moral courage
Recognizes that people are intrinsically valuable
Weaknesses
There appear to be exceptions to universal principles
Following misguided duties
Duties may conflict with one another

Rawls Justice as Fairness
“Balancing Freedom and Equality”
•	Theorist:  John Rawls
•	Two principles of justice
•	Principle 1:  Each person has an equal right to the same basic liberties that are compatible with similar liberties for all. (equal liberty)
•	Principle 2: Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: (a) they are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity (equal opportunity principle), and (b) they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society. (difference principle)
•	Step behind a veil of ignorance when making decisions
•	Base decisions on the maximin rule--the best choice is the one that guarantees a minimum level of benefits

Justice as Fairness: Evaluation
•	Strengths
•	Reconciles tension between individual freedom and social justice, personal liberty and the common good
•	Guarantees a minimum level of benefits and equal opportunity
•	Protects individuals, rights, and the least advantaged
•	Weaknesses
•	Definitions of justice and fairness differ
•	Debate over giving too much or too little to the have-nots
•	Can reach different conclusions behind the veil of ignorance

Aristotelian Ethics
Live well
•	Theorist:  Aristotle: (384-322)
•	Premise: will make ethical decisions if we develop character traits or virtues (intellectual and moral)
•	Find the middle ground between extremes (the Golden Mean)
•	Build character through habits (repeated patterns of behavior)
•	Goods of the soul are most important
•	Strive to flourish:  eudemonia

Aristotelian Ethics: Evaluation
•	Strengths
•	Addresses the most important questions of life
•	Happiness is a worthy pursuit
•	Combats materialism
•	Builds high character
•	Weaknesses
•	Fails to provide specific guidance to decision makers
•	Finding the middle ground depends on the situation
•	Treats emotion with suspicion
•	Some may never be able to live well

Confucianism
Build Healthy Relationships
•	Theorist:  Confucius (551-479 B.C.E.)
•	Premise: humans are social creatures connected through networks of relationships
•	Policies, norms, procedures (etiquette or li) maintain relationships
•	Follow the Golden Rule:  “Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you”)
•	Key virtue:  benevolence
•	Recognize status and power differences

Confucianism: Evaluation
•	Strengths
•	Recognizes the importance of relationships
•	Offers a blueprint for building healthy relationships
•	Emphasizes treating others with respect, putting their needs first
•	Highlights the importance of setting a  moral example
•	Weaknesses
•	Relationships can undermine justice or fairness
•	Can lead to corruption
•	Can foster authoritarian leadership
•	Can suppress individual rights and dissent
•	Confucians have been slow to endorse universal human rights

Altruism
Concern for others
Theorists:  Jesus, Confucius, major faiths
Premise:  help others regardless of personal cost or benefit; people are the ends
Promotes healthy relationships and organizational citizenship behavior (routine altruistic acts in the organizational setting)
Promotes the ethic of care--concern for individuals

Altruism: Ethic of Care
•	Theorists:  Carol Gilligan, Nel Noddings
•	Premise: focus on the individual needs of others
•	“A different voice” (originally a women’s perspective)
•	Be alert to the needs of others and then meet those needs
•	Five key components
•	Note and meet the needs of those we are responsible for
•	Value emotions
•	Specific needs and relationships take priority over universal principles
•	Break down the barriers between the public and private spheres
•	View persons as both relational and interdependent

Altruism: Evaluation
•	Strengths
•	A powerful force for good
•	Prevents ethical abuses
•	Promotes healthy relationships and organizations
•	Lays the foundation for high moral character
•	Weaknesses
•	Not easy to put into practice
•	Disagreement over what constitutes loving behavior
•	Conflicts with the ethic of justice