Buisness ethics Flashcards
proponents of CSR argue
good ethics is good business because its profitable to have good public image and avoid regulation
ultintarians and kantians on ethics and buisness
should be some restrictions on business
-not all decisions profitable if against happiness of duty
Freidman on ethics and business
-ethics and business have nothing to do with each other
-business only responsibility maximise profit
-ethically good because its result of freedom and enabled economic growth
enviormental CSR
-reduce pollution
not recycling
-rely on renewable resources
-carbon neutral
community CSR
-respect human rights
-avoid exploitation
-donate money
-health of workers, wage
ESG
enviormental, social governance
-governance adds requirment to avoid political corruption like bribery
benefits of CSR
allow a business to maximise profits by minimising risks and doing well
-improves public relations
utilltarianism on CSR
-free market best way to maximise happiness
-accept CSR because damage of happiness because of climate
-free market best for humans and any restrictions on business which would interfere that not good
free market capitalism
only responsibility of a business is to maximise profit for its shareholders
kantian ethics on CSR
second formulation says dont treat people as means
-basic respect to employees and stakeholders
-avoid exploitation
-safe work enviorment- no fraud
-all of these community CSR
-no pollution- envio CSR
CSR and window dressing
friedman- CSR becomes window dressing
-centre left regard CSR as window dressing
-business that engages in CSR for PR unethical
profit maximisation criticism of CSR
-business only give calculated profit to charities to gain public opinion for more profits
-if they found out about inequality public might vote for left wing parties who would make business pay more than CSR
globalisation
-business are global entities in multiple countries
-economies-markets- cultures integrated
problem with globalisation
-cause violation of CSR and undermine free market
-more money= power
-power pressures people/ govs
-violate CSR in developing countries
offshore outsourcing
business build products in factories in third world countries
-more jobs from western countries to other countries= unemployment
issue of monopolies
if business gains enough power over market- they can rig system to reduce competition
-when business has dominance and without competition market has no innovation and economic progress
governemts and globalisation
-business more powerful than politics
-no ones democratically elected
-corporations effect law or campaigns
-business manipulate market for its benefit = monopoly
utilltarianism on globalisation
-would be against aspects of it which undermine free markets- such as power it has given to business over policy making
-might accept off shore outsourcing- happiness maximised
kant on globalisation
-can cause all of CSR duties to be violated
whistleblowing
-when someone- employee leaks information of wrongdoing of company
face book case study- whistleblowing
frances haugen leaked facebook files
-acknowledges it makes body issues worse for one in three teenage girls
ad and disad to whistleblowing
-ad- negative practise of business brought to surface
-disad- suffer financial loss- loss of jobs
-company doing good also stopped
utilltarianism on whistleblowing
-acts says its morally right depending on situation
-is more happiness then good
kant on whistleblowing
lying cant be universalized so never right
-against lying to cover up business practices
-dont lie so whistle always right
-never treat people as means so right to whistleblowing
sweatshops
-factory where children and adults work =- unsafe conditions- long hours
sweatshops and CSR
-responsibility of business to ensure non of products from sweatshops
sweatshops and whistleblowing
-if company sourcing products from sweatshops then valid reason to whistle blow
sweatshops and globalisation
sweatshops result of offshore outsourcing which is consequence of globalisation
ultintarian defence of sweatshops
William masaskill- boycotting sweatshops will take away working opportunities people have
-they at least earn some money
-if we demand good treatment then business would lose profit and close them
-for globalisation and agaisnt whistle and CSR
primark case study
primark has exploitative factories in third world countries
-payed people for little hours
-in response primark cut ties with those suppliers
criticism- utilltarianism justifies bad actions
not with basis for human rights which are deontological- right must be respected regardeless of consequence
-human rights influenced by kants formula of humanity
mills harm principle as defence
-society will be happiest of rule of not harming others followed
-does expolitation count as harm
-sweatshops permissible- fed and allowed to leave
-child labour not
-
what does utlitarisniam require
-we can know and predict consequences
-make compelx calculations
-calculations include objective measuring
mental state like pleasure and pain
calculations to CSR
-effects of CSR hard to predict
-both how they might negatively cost business and how positive it may effect society
calculation on globalisation
effects hard to predict
-hard to say how much poverty off shore outsourcing may prevent
calculations and whistleblowing
-possible for business to lose employees or go bankrupt
-hard to know if it would maximise happiness or not
benthams response to calculations
-action right regarding tendency which it appears to have to maximise happiness
-only need to have reasonable expectation of what consequences will be based on actions in past
mills response to issue of calculation
mills version avoids calculation
-only need to know secondary principle society had judged best conducts for happiness
-moral obligation- do our best to follow principles to happiness in society
kant consequences and whistleblowing
-some cases have bad consequences
- workers lose job and starve
-kant says dont lie even if people die
-globalisation has good consequences
response of kant and criticism of kant
-kant- wre cannot predict or control consequences
-we can to some degree and we are morally responsible for consequences
intention and consequantalism
-only think about consequences but not with intention carried out actions
-kant says moral intention relevant to goodness of action
intention and CSR
-ultintarianism wouldnt care about business engaging in CSR or PR out of greed
-if it has good consequences its morally good
whistleblowing and intention
-person might only do it to bring down rival company
-kant wouldnt have this issue because we must act out of good intention
mills response to kants intention
-persons character matters because it determines future actions
-having good character helps you be happy
-motives matter ethically
-only if they result in good consequences
-not intrinsically
kant response and lead critique to kant
kant would say greed itself should be seen as morally deficient
-leads- its impractical to think humans can think without emotion
-utiltarianism accepts avoiding negative and gaining positive out goal
adam smith and capitalism
-argued when people follow their rational self interest in free market result is economic prosperity which benefits society
-free market people gain money y providing product
-origin of view good business decisions have positive social results and linked to good ethics
ultintarianism on capitalism and business ethics
bentham influenced by adam smith- accept general happiness maximised by leaving markets free
-mill and bentham thought restrictions needed to be placed to direct happiness where it failed to
kant on capitalism and business ethics
kant influenced by adam smith- agreed division of labor important for progress
-involved individuals pursuing rational self interest- good
=contractual agreements- ends not means
ultitarianism summed up
CSR is generally good and if globalisation detracts from CSR its bad
kant view summed up
CSR is our duty and globalisation which undermines CSR is wrong
Friedman on CSR and globalisation
-profit main focus
-rejects both approaches
-not good to apply restrictions
-capitalism = freedom
-poverty 70% in 1960 to 17% in 2012
-europe more equal than USA but less innnovative
criticism on friedman
0thinks freedom is good but leads to monopolies under globalisation
-monopolies undermine innovation and freedom
-free market unstable- rigging= power
