Author\u2019s Name<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Institutional Affiliation<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Date of Submission<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Unit 2 Assignment LS312 Explore Ethical Theories Applied in the Making of a Business Decision<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ethical theories play a critical role in providing a clear and unified account of an organization\u2019s or an individual\u2019s ethical obligations in a specific setting or situation. This case means these theories attempt to tell specific stories about what people are obligated to do without referring directly to any specific example. As a result, it has become common in the discussion related to business ethics with the primary aim of appealing to different ethical theories to clarify what is right and wrong in any given situation. In some cases, common ethical theories being appealed to include utilitarianism, deontological, and norm ethical theories. This paper will compare these theories while explaining how they can be used by recommending the best course of action to consider in the Volkswagen engineer\u2019s case. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Deontological Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This theory states that ethical behaviors must or should focus on following a specific established set of principles in any situation. Besides, the theory also emphasizes the relationships between human actions\u2019 morality and duty. As a result, the theory considers any action morally good based on some characteristics of the action itself and not because its outcomes are good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on the Volkswagen engineer in this case and the deontological theory, although the directions to create temporary and defeat device software came from the company, it was unethical, particularly for the company itself. However, the ability of the engineer to use reason, in this case, is what defines him. This case means that based on the decision and directions presented by the company to the engineer, it would have been important for the engineer to reason and make the best decision regarding the situation. From an ethical perspective, the personhood of the engineer is important as it creates different rights and obligations (Chen & Schonger, 2020). Logically, all people are inherent dignity, which remains important to and is most importantly held in equal measure by all people. Dignity, in this case, would have prevented the engineering from acting in a way that would have violated measures provided to protect the environment. As a result, the best decision or step that the engineer could have taken would have to talk to the company\u2019s leaders and present the matter, thus making the right and ethical decisions to prevent other issues like lawsuits and bad reputations towards the company. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Utilitarianism Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n As a theory of morality, utilitarianism advocates mainly for actions that help foster happiness or pressures while opposing specific actions that will either result in unhappiness or harm. Therefore, utilitarianism would say that an action is right if it can only result in positive outcomes that will lead to happiness for the people and society in general (Smart, 2020).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on this theory, it is evident that the decision of Volkswagen would have been good, particularly for the company. However, its impacts would harm the environment, making the company\u2019s decision unethical as the Volkswagen engineer, in this case, is guilty due to accepting and following the direction provided by the company. This case means that the engineer should not have followed the direction, particularly by making the right decisions, either by declining the directions or creating non-defeat device software. Consequently, the engineer should have presented the issue to the company\u2019s authority or leaders to make the right decisions, thus preventing environmental harm that this device software would have resulted. In doing so, the engineer would have avoided more harm, particularly to the environment and societies in general. The primary focus, in this case, should have been on the fact that everyone\u2019s happenings, not only of the company, matter, thus the need for the right decision. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Norm Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This theory focuses on specific standards related to moral conduct that an entire group must follow. The theory, therefore, offers a conceptual framework that plays a critical role in highlighting normality as a crucial factor in the experience of regret. Based on this theory, the effective response of the engineer in consideration to the outcomes would have been affected by the magnitude of the differences between the actual and expected outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The expected outcomes based on the provided decisions favored the company in general; on the other hand, the actual outcomes violated environmental regulations, thus making these directions unethical. The engineer\u2019s norms, in this case, could have been prescriptive. This case means that the engineer should have focused on encouraging positive behaviors of the company, particularly by remaining honest about provided environmental regulations and expectations from all organizations. This case means the engineer should have been proscriptive by discouraging negative decisions and behaviors, particularly by avoiding such cheating behaviors. Logically, the engineer\u2019s behaviors could have been influenced mainly by misperceptions of how the company thought and its decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n These three ethical theories are important as they would help the engineer decide and make corrections to the provided directions. The engineer’s primary focus should have been making ethical decisions, not only to benefit the company but also to follow regulations and avoid possible negative outcomes, both for the organization and society. <\/p>\n\n\n\n References<\/p>\n\n\n\n Blay, A. D., Gooden, E. S., Mellon, M. J., & Stevens, D. E. (2018). The usefulness of social norm theory in empirical business ethics research: A review and suggestions for future research. Journal of Business Ethics<\/em>, 152<\/em>(1), 191-206.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chen, D. L., & Schonger, M. (2020). Social preferences or sacred values? theory and evidence of deontological motivations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Smart, J. J. C. (2020). Utilitarianism and its applications. In New directions in Ethics<\/em> (pp. 24-41). Routledge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unit 2 Assignment LS312 Explore Ethical Theories Applied in the Making of a Business Decision<\/p>\n\n\n\n Author\u2019s Name<\/p>\n\n\n\n Institutional Affiliation<\/p>\n\n\n\n Date of Submission<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unit 2 Assignment LS312 Explore Ethical Theories Applied in the Making of a Business Decision<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Ethical theories play a critical role in providing a clear and unified account of an organization\u2019s or an individual\u2019s ethical obligations in a specific setting or situation. This case means these theories attempt to tell specific stories about what people are obligated to do without referring directly to any specific example. As a result, it has become common in the discussion related to business ethics with the primary aim of appealing to different ethical theories to clarify what is right and wrong in any given situation. In some cases, common ethical theories being appealed to include utilitarianism, deontological, and norm ethical theories. This paper will compare these theories while explaining how they can be used by recommending the best course of action to consider in the Volkswagen engineer\u2019s case. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Deontological Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This theory states that ethical behaviors must or should focus on following a specific established set of principles in any situation. Besides, the theory also emphasizes the relationships between human actions\u2019 morality and duty. As a result, the theory considers any action morally good based on some characteristics of the action itself and not because its outcomes are good.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on the Volkswagen engineer in this case and the deontological theory, although the directions to create temporary and defeat device software came from the company, it was unethical, particularly for the company itself. However, the ability of the engineer to use reason, in this case, is what defines him. This case means that based on the decision and directions presented by the company to the engineer, it would have been important for the engineer to reason and make the best decision regarding the situation. From an ethical perspective, the personhood of the engineer is important as it creates different rights and obligations (Chen & Schonger, 2020). Logically, all people are inherent dignity, which remains important to and is most importantly held in equal measure by all people. Dignity, in this case, would have prevented the engineering from acting in a way that would have violated measures provided to protect the environment. As a result, the best decision or step that the engineer could have taken would have to talk to the company\u2019s leaders and present the matter, thus making the right and ethical decisions to prevent other issues like lawsuits and bad reputations towards the company. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Utilitarianism Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n As a theory of morality, utilitarianism advocates mainly for actions that help foster happiness or pressures while opposing specific actions that will either result in unhappiness or harm. Therefore, utilitarianism would say that an action is right if it can only result in positive outcomes that will lead to happiness for the people and society in general (Smart, 2020).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Based on this theory, it is evident that the decision of Volkswagen would have been good, particularly for the company. However, its impacts would harm the environment, making the company\u2019s decision unethical as the Volkswagen engineer, in this case, is guilty due to accepting and following the direction provided by the company. This case means that the engineer should not have followed the direction, particularly by making the right decisions, either by declining the directions or creating non-defeat device software. Consequently, the engineer should have presented the issue to the company\u2019s authority or leaders to make the right decisions, thus preventing environmental harm that this device software would have resulted. In doing so, the engineer would have avoided more harm, particularly to the environment and societies in general. The primary focus, in this case, should have been on the fact that everyone\u2019s happenings, not only of the company, matter, thus the need for the right decision. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Norm Theory<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This theory focuses on specific standards related to moral conduct that an entire group must follow. The theory, therefore, offers a conceptual framework that plays a critical role in highlighting normality as a crucial factor in the experience of regret. Based on this theory, the effective response of the engineer in consideration to the outcomes would have been affected by the magnitude of the differences between the actual and expected outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The expected outcomes based on the provided decisions favored the company in general; on the other hand, the actual outcomes violated environmental regulations, thus making these directions unethical. The engineer\u2019s norms, in this case, could have been prescriptive. This case means that the engineer should have focused on encouraging positive behaviors of the company, particularly by remaining honest about provided environmental regulations and expectations from all organizations. This case means the engineer should have been proscriptive by discouraging negative decisions and behaviors, particularly by avoiding such cheating behaviors. Logically, the engineer\u2019s behaviors could have been influenced mainly by misperceptions of how the company thought and its decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n These three ethical theories are important as they would help the engineer decide and make corrections to the provided directions. The engineer’s primary focus should have been making ethical decisions, not only to benefit the company but also to follow regulations and avoid possible negative outcomes, both for the organization and society. <\/p>\n\n\n\n References<\/p>\n\n\n\n Blay, A. D., Gooden, E. S., Mellon, M. J., & Stevens, D. E. (2018). The usefulness of social norm theory in empirical business ethics research: A review and suggestions for future research. Journal of Business Ethics<\/em>, 152<\/em>(1), 191-206.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chen, D. L., & Schonger, M. (2020). Social preferences or sacred values? theory and evidence of deontological motivations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Smart, J. J. C. (2020). Utilitarianism and its applications. In New directions in Ethics<\/em> (pp. 24-41). Routledge.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Author\u2019s Name Institutional Affiliation Date of Submission Unit 2 Assignment LS312 Explore Ethical Theories Applied in the Making of a Business Decision Introduction Ethical theories play a critical role in providing a clear and unified account of an organization\u2019s or an individual\u2019s ethical obligations in a specific setting or situation. This case means these theories […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1057","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ethics"],"yoast_head":"\n