Business ethics assignment

1,502 views
1,325 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,502
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Business ethics assignment

  1. 1. Ethical Analysis-Company VsFamily By: Ravi Setia Ravi Setia BE-MBA 400807033 Word count: 1100+ 8/19/2012
  2. 2. Business Relationships and Ethics By: Ravi SetiaTable of ContentsIntroduction ............................................................................................................................................ 2Case Outline ............................................................................................................................................ 2Actors Involved ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Actors directly involved ...................................................................................................................... 2 Actors indirectly involved ................................................................................................................... 2Key ethical and moral issues ................................................................................................................... 3Viewpoints .............................................................................................................................................. 3 1. Raj ................................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Bribing Supplier ............................................................................................................................... 3 3. Raju ................................................................................................................................................. 4 4. Raj’s Company ................................................................................................................................. 4 5. Other Suppliers ............................................................................................................................... 4Ethical Analysis........................................................................................................................................ 4Kantian Ethical Theory ............................................................................................................................ 4 Decision Rule....................................................................................................................................... 4 Self-destructive Counterpoint............................................................................................................. 4 Categorical imperative: Usage consideration ..................................................................................... 4Utilitarian Theory .................................................................................................................................... 4Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 5References .............................................................................................................................................. 5 pg. 1
  3. 3. Business Relationships and Ethics By: Ravi SetiaIntroduction Case OutlineThe case involves an employee, Raj, of a small company. Raj works in thePurchase Department of the company. With the passage of time, Raju earnedthe reputation of being a fair, honest and responsible employee. Raj’s job is tofinalise one supplier out of three for a certain commodity. Raj has almostfinalised one supplier.Raj has a son, Raju, who is a big fan of cricket and wants o watch a live cricketmatch in VVIP box but neither Raj nor Raju were able to procure tickets for thematch. One of the suppliers offered Raj the tickets. The ethical dilemma liesaround Raj whether he should accept the tickets and select that supplier fororder or decline the offer for tickets.Actors InvolvedActors directly involved 1. Raj Raj, having the reputation of being honest, fair and responsible employee is in ethical dilemma. Raj may compromise on his reputation and make a biased choice for selection of supplier or he can continue with his reputation and does not accept the tickets to cricket match. 2. Supplier offering the tickets The supplier seems to be a clever man who wants to get the order by hook or crook and is not shy of bribery. 3. Raju Raj’s son, Raju, is die-hard cricket fan who wants to watch live cricket match in VVIP box at any cost. Raju will be able to fulfil his wish only when Raj takes the tickets from one of the supplier and compromises on his reputation.Actors indirectly involved 1. Raj’s Company The company where raj works will suffer since it won’t receive the best available product at best price which it could only if Raj wouldn’t compromise on his stand. 2. Other Suppliers They will lose this business opportunity despite of being the most suitable for the order if Raj accepts the tickets. pg. 2
  4. 4. Business Relationships and Ethics By: Ravi SetiaKey ethical and moral issuesBuilding a reputation is a task which takes many years. One mistake may risk everything Rajhas hard-earned over the years. Raj’s company will also bear losses as well as other suppliers.The company won’t get the best product at best price and suppliers won’t get the orderdespite being ahead of the competition in terms of price and quality. On the other hand, Rajwill bring great happiness to his only son, Raj. The happiness and joy Raju will get is notquantifiable and can only be felt. Raj, having only one child feels inclined towardcompromising his values for his son’s happiness.The company where raj works may suffer huge losses if the product they receive is of poorquality. The company may further lose their business and reputation of supplying goodquality products. Raj alongside may lose everything if his action is discovered.The supplier on the other hand believes in getting the order by hook or crook. He may go toany extent to get the order which would not have been possible by fair means. The othersuppliers will lose faith in the company and the industry as a whole if such practices start andthey are unable to get order by fair means on merit. They would also then think of usingunfair means to get the order and this ultimately would lead to starting of a trend from wherethere is no turning back.Viewpoints1. Raj“Should I compromise on my moral values and company’s business to get something Iwant?”“Is my son’s happiness more important than my career?”“But Raju will be very happy to see the match from the pavilion.”“Other suppliers may lose a lot of business and may not do business with us again”“Is it worth risking everything I have earned on such a thing?”2. Bribing Supplier“I need to get the order at any cost if I have to survive in the competition”“It won’t affect Raj directly. It’s not his company after all. He is just an employee.”“Moreover I am paying (tickets) him well in return” pg. 3
  5. 5. Business Relationships and Ethics By: Ravi Setia3. Raju“Going to a live cricket match can be so very exciting and I wish I can go to one and sit withthe cricketers”4. Raj’s CompanyEach employee should be honest, fair and responsible while doing his job and work towardsachieving what is in the best interests of the company. An employee should never put hispersonal goals above company’s objectives.5. Other Suppliers“Mr. Raj is a very honest and responsible man. He will give the order to the best supplier. Weshould not use any unfair means to secure the order.”Ethical AnalysisKantian Ethical TheoryKantian ethics are deontological, revolving entirely around duty rather than emotions or endgoals. It is according to this that the moral worth of any action is judged. Kants ethics arefounded on his view of rationality as the ultimate good and his belief that all people arefundamentally rational beings.[1].Decision Rule“There is no defined way to take an action. Action varies with the surrounding environment.”Self-destructive CounterpointIf the above stated rule is used everywhere, there would b a wide variation in decisions andmany times would not be the rationally right choice as environment would vary for everyindividual.Categorical imperative: Usage considerationAcceptance of the tickets would be considered a betray to the company and to the jobresponsibility assigned to Raj. He would be using his power to make profits which is not his.The bribing supplier will use Raj’s vulnerability to win the order which he wouldn’t have gototherwise.Utilitarian TheoryAccording to utilitarianism the moral worth of an action is determined only by its resultingoutcome although there is debate over how much consideration should be given to actualconsequences, foreseen consequences and intended consequences.[2] pg. 4
  6. 6. Business Relationships and Ethics By: Ravi SetiaCase 1: Raj accepts the tickets without being caught Happy Unhappy Raj Other Suppliers Raju Bribing Supplier Raj’s CompanyCase 2: Raj doesn’t accept the tickets Happy Unhappy Raj Raj Other Suppliers Bribing Supplier Raj’s Company RajuCase 3: Raj gets caught after accepting the tickets Happy Unhappy Other Suppliers Raj Raj’s Company Raju Bribing SupplierConclusionFrom the Kantianism point of view, Raj’s decision to accept the tickets and compromise onhis values is not right.Utilitarian view is situation dependent. Thus Raj should consider all factors before makingthe final decision.References1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantianism2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism pg. 5

×