Because virtue ethics emphasizes individual character and conscience, it can have a tremendous influence on organizational culture by encouraging individuals to stand up for sound, ethical, and responsible business practices.
False. Confucius’s hope for reform was the five great relationships that support Chinese society:
parent/child, husband/wife, elder/junior sibling, master/apprentice, and ruler/subject.
Wholeheartedness and sincerity require not just competence but compassion when dealing with stakeholders and making executive decisions. Reflecting the overall Confucian concern for balance, they temper initiative and boldness with self-regulation.
False. In Confucian ethics, the locus of ethics and moral decision making was the family rather than the individual. The most important value was the development of humanity and putting an end to anarchy, and this was done best in the context of the family.
Utilitarianism is pervasive in contemporary business practice, management theory, and decision-making through cost-benefit analysis. Decisions are often made based on the “bottom line” of profit, numbers of stakeholders affected, or overall utility to the organization. Utilitarianism is reflected in this abiding emphasis on efficiency, often to the neglect of other factors.
Certainly there exists a need today to engage in political debate that includes all sides of an issue in respectful ways. Mill’s teaching on the role of free speech in society can be a starting point and a reminder of the importance of civil debate and freedom.
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist philosophy dependent solely on outcomes. Although focused on rights, Mill’s utilitarianism also depends on results. Deontology is concerned with motive, duty, and one’s obligation to act regardless of circumstances or outcomes.
Because Kantian ethics is about treating people not as means but as ends, this philosophy can influence nearly every aspect of business, from research and development to production, manufacturing, marketing, and consumption. It may be difficult to implement, however, because many businesses are focused on efficiency and production to the near-exclusion of other factors.
Rawls’s theory has been called radical because it redistributes goods and services without regard for extenuating circumstances or historical context. It also has been accused of stifling enterprise, innovation, and investment.