Prescriptive Approaches

to Ethics
Geoffrey G. Bell, PhD, CA
University of Minnesota
Duluth
October 2004

Sources for Lecture

Our text
Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysics of
Morals (many editions)
Mill, J.S., Utilitarianism (many editions)
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice,
Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cavanagh, G.F., D.J. Moberg, and M.
Velasquez (1981). The ethics of
organizational politics, Academy of
Management Review, 6(3): 363-374.

Problems with Prescriptive

Approaches

People tend to be a blend, not

purely Utilitarian or Kantian or
whatever.
Prescriptive approaches give
conflicting advice, or no advice at all.

Who gets the heart transplant?

Rejean is 55 years old, recently retired, and covered fully by

health care. He is married, and his children are adults with
children of their own. Historically, Rejean has been active, but
with his recent heart attack, he has become bed-ridden.
Without a transplant, he will die.
Mary is 23 years old, and a single mother of one 2-year-old boy.
She is on welfare, and has no health insurance. Her parents
are retired, but just barely making ends meet, so cannot
provide financial assistance for the operation. She needs a
transplant to survive.
Tom is a 35 year old, married, laborer; the father of a 15-yearold daughter and a 10-year-old son. His work provides partial
health care, but he would need to take out a second mortgage
on his house to pay much of the cost of a transplant operation.
Without the transplant, Tom can expect to live probably 5 years
before other vital organs fail.
Who should get the heart, assuming its a fit for all, and why?

Consequentialist Theory

Also called teleological.

Concerned with outcomes or consequences
of action, and hence the name.
Utilitarianism is well-known example.
Utilitarianism seeks to maximize welfare of
all people concerned with decision.
Makes for very difficult calculus
(information-processing demands very
high).

Deontological theory (Kantianism)

Focused on ethics as duty (what ought to

be done).
Pure Kantianism has no regard for
outcomes of decision.
Can the decision rule be turned into a
universal rule? If not, then its unethical.

(e.g., promise-breaking is wrong; lying is wrong)

Always treat people as ends and never as

means to an end.
Problem with horrendous outcomes.

E.g., axe murderer.

An Introduction to Justice

Justice is often used to refer to what is fair.

Justice concerns giving people what they
deserve.
Often arises in questions of distribution:

If there are a fixed number of organs to be

donated, what is a just way to allocate them?
If there is a shortfall of state revenue, what is a
just way to allocate the cuts?
If taxes must be raised, what is a just
apportionment of the raises?

Business is concerned with wealth

allocation, so justice is a relevant concept.

Rawls Theory of Justice

Rawls asks people to imagine a situation

in which free and equal self-interested
persons attempt to arrive at unanimous
agreement on principles that will serve as
the basis for constructing the major
institutions of society.
Rawls pre-contractual situation (the
original position) is one in which people
act behind a veil of ignorance.

They are asked to agree on the principles of

justice without knowing about themselves and
their position (sex, race, class, natural ability,
intelligence, etc.).

Rawls Principles of Justice

1.

2.

Each person is to have an equal right

to the most extensive total system of
basic liberties compatible with a
similar system of liberty for all.
Social and economic inequalities are to
be arranged so that they are both:
A. to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged,
and
B. attached to offices and positions open to all
under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.

Rawls First Principle

Reasoning an equal share of whatever is

available is the most any person could
reasonably expect, given his requirement
of unanimous consent.
No one would voluntarily take less than an
equal share because to do so would make
that person comparatively worse off.
Based on the idea that he who cuts the
cake gets the last piece.

Rawls Difference Principle (2a)

Persons in the original

position would accept
inequality when the least
advantaged person is
better off.
Assumes that there is a
worst off person,
although we dont know
who in advance.
Situation II is preferred to I
as the worst off is
advantages, but III is not
preferred to II.
Based on a maximin
strategy a rational
person will maximize the
minimum outcome.

I
A

II

1 A
6
9 B

7 C
3
2

III
1
4
1
1
1
1
3
6

A
B
C

1
5
1
2
1
0
3
7

Rawls Principle of Equal

Opportunity (2b)

Whether a person gets a certain job

(or whatever) should be determined
by competence rather than any
irrelevant characteristic.
In a just society, every attempt
should be made to eliminate
differences that result from accidents
of birth and social condition.

Putting it together:
Cavanagh et al
Yes

Does the decision

respect rights of all
involved?
Yes

Yes
No

Yes

Does the decision

respect the canons of
justice?
Yes

Accept decision

Are there
overwhelming factors
No
justifying
suboptimization?

No

Does the decision

maximize economic
efficiency?

No

Yes

Are there
overwhelming factors
justifying abrogation No
of rights?
Are there
overwhelming factors
justifying violation of
canons of justice?
No

Reject decision

Notes re: Cavanagh et al

Argue you can start with any of the

questions.
For any decision to be ethical, it
must normally accord with all three
major ethical frameworks
(utilitarianism, rights, justice).
If any decision violates any of the
three, there must be an overwhelming
reason to make it ethical.

Trevino and Nelson

Steps to making ethical decisions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

8.

Gather the facts.

Define the ethical issues.
Identify affected parties.
Identify the consequences.
Identify the obligations.
Consider your character and integrity.
Think creatively about potential
actions.
Check your gut.

Do your homework!

Find out in advantage whats expected

ethically at your organization.

Read relevant material.

Ask your boss / co-workers.
Network with key external people.

Think about this in terms of MgtS

plagiarism statement.

Our departmental statement is available on my

web-site. I expect students to follow it while
completing assignments.

Avoid snap decisions

1.

2.
3.

4.

5.

Dont underestimate the importance

of a hunch to alert you to the
possibility of an ethical dilemma.
Ask for time.
Does the organization have a formal
policy?
Ask for advice (dont forget friends /
family).
Use the test of the 6 oclock news.

Conclusions

There are several prescriptive

approaches to ethics.
The problem with them is they often
either provide no advice or provide
conflicting advice to practicing
managers.
Cavanagh et al sought to overcome this
problem by providing a flowchart to
help assess the ethicality of a decision.