Introduction to Deontology Ethics
Question:
What ethical approach would be better for ethical decision making deontology and teleology?
Deontology ethics refers to an ethical position that judges morality of an action based on the existing rules. Sometimes it is described in terms of duty, obligation or rules-based ethics. A moral judgment is placed on a person (actor) as to whether they complied with the set rules and obligations. Deontology is not concerned with whether the action to be taken is reliable or inappropriate but only focuses on the set rules and steps to be followed (action). For instance, an employee has to obey the orders given by their employer to perform certain tasks, without having to weigh whether or not the action will give the desired result or not as far as that is what the rule dictate (Carlson, Kacmar and Wadsworth 2009). On the other hand, teleology which is also known as finality refers to ethics based on an explanation for something or in function of its end or purpose or goal. It involves goal or purpose and also gives the reason or explanation of the results. When passing judgment on the action of a human, deontology ethics focuses on that which is an obligation or duty. While teleology ethics mainly focuses on that which is good or desirable to achieve the better end result. Before focusing on what ethical approach is considered appropriate in business, we must be aware that ethical consideration also has rules that are employed to give maximum benefit to the society and the business itself (Anunciação Santos and Rocha 2009). The rules guiding business ethics may include; utilitarian rule, moral right rule, justice rule, and practical rule.
The four rules of business ethics are to be followed in order to do what is morally right even as businesses focus to make more profits. Utilitarian rules state that, the action or decision taken has to have the largest positive impact to all parties concerned including business itself, stakeholders, customers and all people interested in that business (Kujala, Lämsä and Penttilä K2011). The next business ethical rule is moral right and it states that decisions made must guard or uphold the basic right of the population. It mostly tries to weigh whether or not the decision arrived at matches with the general moral code of ethics. The next most important business rule of ethics is justice rule which states that any decision or action should distribute harm and benefit on an equal basis to all the population involved (Szerletics 2010). No member should have more benefit or harm than the other. The other important consideration in this context is the practical rule (Massotte 2017). This rule state that any decision or action in business should be that which managers will not be afraid of telling members of society because they would think it is acceptable.
The Four Rules of Business Ethics
Ford and Richard 2013, states that ethical beliefs and decision making are influenced by variablesthat are unique to the individual decision maker and viewed situational in nature. The variables they state are related to individual decision maker includes; personality, employment, education, age, sex, religion, and nationality. Situation variables can be business competitiveness, industry, organizational effects, type of ethical conflict, codes of conducts, referent groups, and rewards and sanctions (Trevino and Nelson 2016).
Deontology ethical approach would be better in business decision making as human beings are to have rules to guide them not to focus their decision on personal interests. Businesses’ decision dictates its success and the best rules guiding the decision or actions of workers will enable businesses to avoid wrong consequences (Yoon 2011). Deontological ethics has many strengths and also weaknesses just like other ethical approaches. Some of these strengths will help business to thrive as they continue to impact as many peoples’ lives positively as possible. The fact that this ethical approach is far less flexible and has rules and morals to follow can be effective in business decision making. This approach has simple rules guiding businesses to make their decision easily in business situations which helps in time-saving when providing solutions to business clients (Anunciação Santos and Rocha 2009). This approach is simple to apply as the decision is guided by stated rules and morality. For instance, when deciding whether or not to show faces of victims of rape on a television to speed justice, the right for individual privacy protection will help to draw a conclusion (Crossan, Mazutis and Seijts, 2013). Unlike teleology ethical approach which is more individualistic, deontology approach is more general and applies to everyone. CavaliereMulvaney and Swerdlow 2010, state that deontology can save time in business situations as it is simple to follow the stipulated rules rather than having to every aspect of the situation. This is more important to business as it helps to avoid single person(s) consideration at the expense of the majority who are pillars of the business (Weiss 2014).
Deontology approach also helps in forming an ordered society. Vago 2015 state that “the development of trade and industry requires a system of formal and universal legal rules dealing with business organizations and commercial transactions” Therefore, there is a need to construct rules for humans to follow. The decision of revealing faces of victims of rape on a television in order for them to get justice would be considered immoral as it may cause even more harm to the victims and their families although it would bring them justice. In business ethics, it would be wrong to sell expired food items to a person even when they are willing to have it at fewer prices (Cavaliere, Mulvaney and Swerdlow 2010). This is because it is human right to get access to healthy food and spend their money on what can improve their lives. If the decision of a business person upholds this principle it is morally right.
Variables Influencing Ethical Beliefs and Decision Making
Business decision making should be keenly looked at and more importantly whether the action arrived at is wrong or not, this is one principle of deontological ethics. Kant who is a deontological thinker would say it is wrong always to lie even if lies would bring positive results. Kant’s thinking is important in business reputation as it can cost business huge loses in future if it may be realized.Ciulla, Martin and Solomon 2011, agrees to Kant thinking by stating that, “Ethics stands at the very core of our working lives and of society as a whole, defining the public image of the business community and the ways in which individual companies and people behave”However, in theological ethics, according to Jeremy Bentham it would be acceptable to lie to save a life if the consequence of lie would produce the most favourable outcome for the whole society. Here Jeremy focuses only on the consequences which could not be very good in business’ public image. The teleological approach in business would only focus on the consequences taken in accordance to decision made, but the deontologist will be concerned as to whether the action was moral or not (Ulrich and Sarasin 2012).
Deontology ethics has complete rules such as natural law theory which has five primary precepts such as “maintaining an orderly society’” or “protecting the lives of innocents” that must be followed, unlike teleological ethics which is far less the same. These are absolute rules which are not to be broken under whatever circumstances. Here, for instance, it would not be justifiable in any case, to sell expired food items as it would break morals of “maintaining an orderly society”. Whether the product would bring loses to the business or not, once expired should not be sold to a customer if the business has a goal to keep their customers health. But Singer, who is a preference utilitarianism state in regard to selling, expired item that if the person was ready to die they should be allowed to do so(Iyabora2013). Rules could not be applicable here to stop them, so eating expired food would be allowed. Teleological and deontological decision-making methods are in opposition to individual ethical believes, where the individual themselves where they contributed to the outcome(Crossan, Mazutis and Seijts 2013).
Even though this ethical approach would to some extent be beneficial to the business decision-making process, weaknesses associated with it is common. For instance, it lacks the strength of teleological approach in that it is not flexible which makes business vulnerable to consequences that are morally wrong, such as denying a dying person food to eat and save their life, as this approach would not allow giving expired item since it allows even though it was to help the majority (Kujala, Lämsä and Penttilä).
Strengths of Deontological Ethical Approach in Business Decision Making
The other weakness of deontology is that it is not impersonal or individualistic. This system may not be very good to apply in21st century where almost every situation in the business environment requires individualism. This approach does not look at the customers’ families, their situation, or their religion and culture and this may make some customers who wanted particular services to refuse them depending on their religious beliefs and cultural practices (Charles 2012). Business people, therefore, may not be able to convince customers of particular services since they are not individualistic and may not be sure of whether the service would work or not. In as far as doing the right thing and justice to the majority is concerned with this approach, it does not consider the consequences of an action at all. It bases its decision on whether the action was morally right. Although the action would have been morally right, the consequences produced would be seen unloving, for instance, not giving a customer an expired food item is morally right as one may see it prevent the customer being sick or dying, giving it, on the other hand, would save lives and benefit the majority of people depending on them. This approach, therefore, would not allow reasoning that way but restrict the morality of the action and results would be worse (Ulrich and Sarasin 2012).
There are major differences between deontological approaches and teleological that makes the deontological approach more preferable than the teleological approach in business decision making and these differences are covered below. One, the deontological approach looks at the morality of the action without considering the outcome and conclude whether it was right whereas teleological looks at the consequences of the action to figure out whether it was the best than another available alternative (s) (Ferrell and Fraedrich 2015).
The deontological approach will consider the motives and intents of the individual involved in the act, whilst teleological are more virtual, weighing outcomes and the objectives. As said earlier, Kant a deontological thinker will not accept a lie even if it was justified to produce better results favorable to the majority. On the other hand, a utilitarian will consider lying if the results were to benefit a majority of people or save a life (Nylander 2016).
Through the discussion, you might be asking yourself, what would justify that an action is right or wrong since it has been mentioned severally. Here is the deal; one of the latest scholars in the field of deontological ethics Dr. Joel Marks publicly a top ethical scholar in bioethics, declared that there is nothing that distinguishes between wrong and right. Dr. Joel is an ‘ethicist’ scholar at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Bioethics at Yale University, ah he honestly believes that “The religious fundamentalists are correct: without God, there is no morality. But they are incorrect, I still believe, about there being a God. Hence, I believe, there is no morality.” Other ethicists have done it before and publicly declared that no differences exist between wrong and right. He has now concluded that it is deontological ethics unreasonable as to believe in the Devine power.Dr. Mark in through many of articles in philosophy has developed wholly own “Amoral manifesto” by rejecting deontology existence after realizing that morality was just a fuzzy subjective feeling with nothing more. He states, the following statement “I retain my strong preference for honest dialectical dealings in a context of mutual respect. It’s just that I am no longer giving premises in moral arguments; rather, I am offering considerations to help us figure out what to do. I am not attempting to justify anything; I am trying to motivate informed and reflective choices… But this won’t be because a god, a supernatural law or even my conscience told me I must, I ought, I have an obligation. Instead, I will be moved by my head and my heart. Morality has nothing to do with it” (Taylor 2014).
Weaknesses of Deontological Ethical Approach in Business Decision Making
Conclusion
Decision making is an important and crucial part of any business ethical consideration and a major role in which success is determined. Small businesses’ success depends on the decisions made by the managers, owners or directors as opposed to big companies where every single decision no matter how small it is CEOs and directors has to put it into consideration. From this point, we note that, since the decision is important in business daily life, better ethical consideration must be put in place. This means the ethical consideration should consider rules of ethics which are fidelity, utilitarianism, practical rule, justice rule, and ethical rule. In our discussion, we note that rules are important to guide human behavior and it would be risky letting people operate without following procedures in a business environment. Deontological approach to business will be important to put into consideration due to the reasons already discussed in the context but poses a challenge where there is a need for flexibility. However more importantly business applying deontological rule would reap more and maintain their reputation for a long time if their goal is to benefit the majority through the decision they make.
References
Anunciação, P.F., Santos, J.C. and Rocha, F., 2009. How Important are the Regulation and Supervision Authorities in Economic Society. The New Ethics Value Chain, Investment Management and Financial Innovations International Research Journal, 6(3), pp.273-283.
Carlson, D.S., Kacmar, K.M. and Wadsworth, L.L., 2009. The impact of moral intensity dimensions on ethical decision-making: Assessing the relevance of orientation. Journal of Managerial Issues, pp.534-551.
Cavaliere, F.J., Mulvaney, T.P. and Swerdlow, M.R., 2010. Teaching business ethics after the financial meltdown: is it time for ethics with a sermon?.Education, 131(1), pp.3-8.
Charles, D., 2012. Teleological causation.InThe Oxford Handbook of Aristotle.
Ciulla, J.B., Martin, C.W. and Solomon, R.C., 2011. Honest work: A business ethics reader.
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D. and Seijts, G., 2013. In search of virtue: The role of virtues, values and character strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(4), pp.567-581.
Ferrell, O.C. and Fraedrich, J., 2015. Business ethics: Ethical decision making & cases. Nelson Education.
Ford, R.C. and Richardson, W.D., 2013. Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. In Citation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics (pp. 19-44).Springer, Dordrecht.
Iyabora, F.O., 2013. UNETHICAL PRACTICES IN THE BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT.Asia-Pacific Journal of Education, Business, and Society, 1(1).
Kujala, J., Lämsä, A.M. and Riivari, E., 2017. Company stakeholder responsibility: An empirical investigation of top managers’ attitudinal change. Baltic Journal of Management, 12(2), pp.114-138.
Kujala, J., Lämsä, A.M. and Penttilä, K., 2011. Managers’ moral decision-making patterns over time: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(2), pp.191-207.
Massotte, P., 2017. Business Ethics: Some Principles and Mechanisms. Ethics in Social Networking and Business 1: Theory, Practice and Current Recommendations, pp.123-144.
Nylander, R., 2016. Corporate social responsibility: business benefits from saving the world.
Supervision Authorities in Economic Society?The New Ethics Value Chain, Investment Management and Financial Innovations International Research Journal, 6(3), pp.273-283.
Szerletics, A., 2010. THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS OF LEGAL PATERNALISM (Doctoral dissertation, Ghent University).
Taylor, D.F., 2014. Defining ubuntu for business ethics-a deontological approach.South African Journal of Philosophy= Suid-AfrikaanseTydskrifvirWysbegeerte, 33(3), pp.331-345.
African Journal of Philosophy= Suid-AfrikaanseTydskrifvirWysbegeerte, 33(3), pp.331-345.
Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A., 2016. Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right. John Wiley & Sons.
Ulrich, P. and Sarasin, C. eds., 2012.Facing public interest: The ethical challenge to business policy and corporate communications (Vol. 8).Springer Science & Business Media.
Vago, S., 2015.Law and society.Routledge.
Weiss, J.W., 2014. Business ethics: A stakeholder and issues management approach. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Yoon, C., 2011. Ethical decision-making in the Internet context: Development and test of an initial model based on moral philosophy. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), pp.2401-2409.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
