As we all know, for the past three weeks, our class has examined the implications of theoretical framework on scholarly research regarding business. In ethical theory, some dilemmas can persist in the process of finding the most appropriate strategies to optimize and offer a homogenous working environment. It is necessary to know that there may not always be a clear and concise answer for every situation. There will always be various ethical routes with both advantages and disadvantages, to consider. As leaders, we are expected to be equipped to decipher appropriate actions that support continuity.

Ethical business dilemmas are the result of two opposing perspectives aiming to address a situational drawback. A business decision can be made but judged against two specific theories, one could be deemed ethically right and the other, wrong. How can we truly assess suitability of a theory and whether that theory is conducive of ethical error?

Lets examine utilitarian ethics and deontological ethics. Both approaches are valuable theories that affect decision making but present challenges to reach a balance between the two, especially in the medical industries (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Utilitarian ethics is a form of consequentialist ethical theories; although there are different varieties of utilitarian ethical principles, the basic idea of these principles is based on Benthams theory: maximize utility and prioritize public happiness (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Benthams assumption is that the greatest contentment of most people is the standard that should be used to judge the rightness or wrongness of behaviors (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Utilitarian deals with decision-making based on how the majority will benefit. In contrast to utilitarian principles, deontology principles refer to the ethics of duty, in which no harm is allowed, even if it may lead to positive consequences (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Deontological ethics identifies ones sense of obligation and behaving accordingly.

Professional Experience

The organization I work for, newly enforced a policy surrounding the recent discussion of gun guidelines in America. Leadership implemented the decision that no gun was allowed on the premises. Initially, firearms were not permitted only in the bounds of the facility. Our leadership believed that having access to firearm on the premises would increase the risk of violence. The policy impeded on opportunities of accidental injuries. Given this decision, there was an uproar of pushback from employees expressing their dissent with the plan. The decision supports being morally correct by ensuring that majority benefits which in these cases, all employees benefit from the policies as it yields a safer and protected environment. Essentially when we think about theory, we associate behaviors being ethically and morally right. Never does ethical evoking approaches offer wrong consequences when applied, however, in this case, a party involved is at a disadvantage. Deontological theory is wrong in terms of this decision because the moral right of an individual is impacted. This decision stripped employees of their opportunity to preform ethically under circumstances that would have allowed firearms to be left in vehicle. This further, by proxy restricts individuals from having their firearms off the premises, which can present a risk that substantially would not be a liability of the organization. The deontological theory is also wrong as employees are bond to a duty but it goes against their moral interest. The decision agrees to the utilitarian theory as it supports majority in affording community safety and welfare, on the premises of the organization. My analysis of the two theory is aligned with the idea that a decision can be ethically correct but can morally affect the ethics of an individuals right or judgment to make their own decision.

Comment on this post