Prompt: * What can average employees do in an ethical environment that they can't do in an unethical one? * If we believe that employees are more attracted to ethical organizations, does that support the contention that moral motives are every bit as powerful as economic ones in peoples' decision making? * What are the flaws in thinking only about economic motives? * What are the flaws in thinking only about moral motives? * Initial Post *  * First Reply            In an ethical environment employees can report ethical violations without fear of repercussion. "...You and your employer have a special relationship, and each owes the other a modicum of loyalty based on the relationship" (Trevino & Nelson, 2014, p. 131.) As an agent of a company, an employee is a representative of the brand; the brand embraces this loyalty in an ethical environment.           Employees are more attracted to ethical organizations, because loyalty is comforting. The notion supports the contention that moral motives are as powerful as economic ones in peoples' decision making. "The evidence suggests that employees are more attracted to and more committed to ethical organizations"  (Trevino & Nelson, 2014, p. 23.) In addition, the clear communication offered by ethical organizations is a key performance indicator of employee retention, as it engages in structured  processes.                      The flaws in thinking only about economic motives entail an oversight of moral values for short-term fiscal gain. The flaws in thinking only about moral motives are that one may overlook cost-analysis. "The economic responsibilities of a business involve its primary function of producing goods or services that consumers need and want, while making an acceptable profit"  (Trevino & Nelson, 2014, p. 325.)                     References: Trevino, L., & Nelson., K. (2014). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk About How To Do It            Right. John Wiley and Sons. United States *  * Second Reply Average employees could most likely get away with having less than stellar sales in an ethical environment. They could not do that in an unethical environment. Unethical environments will do whatever it takes to get a sale. Sometimes managers will even encourage their sales representatives to engage in deceit to make a sale. Average employees in an ethical environment would be in a situation where their director/manager is more understanding if the market isn’t there. If we were to believe that employees are more attracted to ethical organizations, it does support the contention that moral motives are every bit as powerful as economic ones in people’s decision making. “A 2006 study found that 82 percent of Americans would actually prefer to be paid less but work for an ethical company than be paid more but work for an unethical company” (Trevino & Nelson, 2017, p. 155). Money is an extremely powerful motivator, but to say that Americans would prefer to work for less money just to .

1. Prompt:
* What can average employees do in an ethical environment that
they can't do in an unethical one?
* If we believe that employees are more attracted to ethical
organizations, does that support the contention that moral
motives are every bit as powerful as economic ones in peoples'
decision making?
* What are the flaws in thinking only about economic motives?
* What are the flaws in thinking only about moral motives?
* Initial Post
*
* First Reply
In an ethical environment employees can report ethical
violations without fear of repercussion. "...You and your
employer have a special relationship, and each owes the other a
modicum of loyalty based on the relationship" (Trevino &
Nelson, 2014, p. 131.) As an agent of a company, an employee
is a representative of the brand; the brand embraces this loyalty
in an ethical environment.
Employees are more attracted to ethical organizations,
because loyalty is comforting. The notion supports the
contention that moral motives are as powerful as economic ones
in peoples' decision making. "The evidence suggests that
employees are more attracted to and more committed to ethical
organizations" (Trevino & Nelson, 2014, p. 23.) In addition,
the clear communication offered by ethical organizations is a
key performance indicator of employee retention, as it engages
in structured processes.
The flaws in thinking only about economic motives entail
an oversight of moral values for short-term fiscal gain. The
flaws in thinking only about moral motives are that one may
overlook cost-analysis. "The economic responsibilities of a
business involve its primary function of producing goods or
services that consumers need and want, while making an
acceptable profit" (Trevino & Nelson, 2014, p. 325.)

2. References:
Trevino, L., & Nelson., K. (2014). Managing Business Ethics:
Straight Talk About How To Do It
Right. John Wiley and Sons. United States
*
* Second Reply
Average employees could most likely get away with having less
than stellar sales in an ethical environment. They could not do
that in an unethical environment. Unethical environments will
do whatever it takes to get a sale. Sometimes managers will
even encourage their sales representatives to engage in deceit to
make a sale. Average employees in an ethical environment
would be in a situation where their director/manager is more
understanding if the market isn’t there.
If we were to believe that employees are more attracted to
ethical organizations, it does support the contention that moral
motives are every bit as powerful as economic ones in people’s
decision making. “A 2006 study found that 82 percent of
Americans would actually prefer to be paid less but work for an
ethical company than be paid more but work for an unethical
company” (Trevino & Nelson, 2017, p. 155). Money is an
extremely powerful motivator, but to say that Americans would
prefer to work for less money just to be in an ethical
environment shows that ethics is just as powerful if not more
powerful in some people’s opinions.
A study found that various elements from different theories on
ethics can provide more profound model of reasons behind
human behavior in comparison to basic assumptions in classical
economics (Baumane-Vitolina, Cals, & Sumilo, 2016). There
are obvious flaws in thinking only about economic motives or
moral motives without consideration of the other. If for
example, one were to think only about economic motives, there

3. could be repercussions to the environment. A great example
would be President Donald Trump signing executive orders for
the Dakota Pipeline. It seems that he is only looking at
economic motives rather than moral motives. Moral motives in
this situation may involve the residents of the area and how they
feel about the pipeline coming through their territory. If one
were to only think about moral motives, they may be unable to
make a profit. Take a senior citizen community for example;
morally one should feel obligated to take care of the elderly, but
it is not financially feasible to do so without at least covering
the costs it takes to care for them.
References:
Baumane-Vitolina, I., Cals, I., & Sumilo, E. (2016). Is Ethics
Rational? Teleological, Deontological and Virtue Ethics
Theories Reconciled in the Context of Traditional Economic
Decision Making. Procedia Economics And Finance, 39, 108-
114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(16)30249-0
Trevino, L. & Nelson, K. (2017). Managing Business Ethics
(6th ed., p. 155). Mason: Wiley.