Resolving Ethical Dilemmas Running Head: M1 Assignment 3

M1: Assignment 3: Resolving Ethical Dilemmas George Miller Argosy University

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

Introduction In the business world ethical dilemmas will be commonplace and stakeholders will have to know how to approach these situations. There are several methods to solving ethical dilemmas. The utilitarian approach may be a better fit for the business arena. This approach affects the majority of individuals in a positive manner and thus is the most democratic. This paper will look at this approach in regards to its theoretical structure, which includes its historical background, basic tenets and major beliefs, its positives/negatives, and then evaluate an application of this approach to a business dilemma. Theory Foundation The utilitarian approach idea framework has its basis in the 19th century and it was utilized to aid legislators to help decide the best moral laws (Richardson, 2011). It is based on the writings of philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, whose familiar motto the greatest good for the greatest number worked towards an unbiased foundation that provided a standard accepted by the greatest number for establishing laws (Valesquez, Andre, Shanks & Meyer, 1989). The philosopher and economist, John Stuart Mill, a generation after Bentham became one of utilitarians effective proponents by arguing in favor of the theory and improving on its structure, meaning and application (Kemerling, 2006). There are 3 basic tenets to this approach for resolving ethical dilemmas which is pretty straightforward: first identify all resolutions to the dilemma, second determine all benefits/harms that can result for each resolution for everyone affected by the action and third after considering the costs choose the best resolve that provides the best benefit (Valesquez et al, 1989).

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

The major belief behind this approach is based on the premise that ethical choices should be based on their consequences. As stated earlier the right action taken should generate the most good compared with disadvantages and should also benefit the greatest number of people (Valesquez et al, 1989). The right action is solely understood entirely in terms of consequences produced and the good is equal among everyone when choosing the right action (Driver, 2009). The approach also does not consider if the action is moral or legal. An example that comes to mind for this type of approach to solving an ethical dilemma is the idea of war. War is often rationalized as being ethical because you may lose soldiers and civilians during the war but in the end the consequence, such as freeing a country of a terrible dictator and giving them democracy, is worth it for the whole of the country. Positive and Negative Criticisms One of the clear positive of this approach is that it will be a good outcome for the most number. A second positive is that the approach forces individuals to examine the outcomes of the decisions they will make or basically encourages individuals to think through choices and thus less likely to make sudden irrational decisions (Valesquez et al, 1989). Other positives are that it is easy to understand and apply and is a popular/common approach (Johnson, 2005). There are also negatives to this approach. Because the utilitarianism approach chooses the most good for the greatest number of people, it may fail to take into consideration justice (Valesquez et al, 1989). Another negative is in order to choose the method that will bring the greatest good a value needs to be put on actions. Sometimes it is difficult to measure actions and compare values of certain benefits/costs (Valesquez, 1989). Other negatives of the approach are decision makers may reach different conclusions and it may have unanticipated outcomes (Johnson, 2005). An

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

example of the latter is when the government made above ground nuclear testing in Nevada and Utah without alerting local citizens in the middle of the 20th century. Their rationale was the testing improved national security however there were unanticipated consequences of higher rates of cancer in the area (Johnson, 2005). Evaluation of Business Ethics Dilemma In the article Marketing Ethics: Is There More to it Than a Utilitarian Approach?, by Jacques Nantel and Williams Week in the European Journal of Marketing a moral business dilemma is mention about the tobacco industry in the United States. The dilemma is back in the late 1980s you had this multibillion dollar industry that was a major economical factor in the U.S. and several states as well as employed thousands of individuals (1996). However it came to light and had been proven that smoking can be detrimental to consumers health. The government could not outlaw smoking because politicians realize that it would not work just like prohibition did not work earlier in that century. Politicians also realized that by taking too drastic of action could cause many individuals to lose their employment, cities and states may lose much needed tax revenue and the economy could not withstand such a hit. The action taken was to take the approach of warning individuals and alerting consumers to the harm of smoking. Allowing individuals to make their own decision on to smoke or not. This was the greatest good for the most people. Smokers would be aware of the danger of smoking and be able to make an educated conscious decision to smoke or not and the industry was allowed to continue providing jobs and revenue for local communities. The effectiveness of the approach in solving the issue was successful to what extent it could be. An individual today when they choose to smoke realizes the danger of smoking and

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

thus if they choose to smoke they know it could be harmful to their health. The industry is not as widespread as it once was but the affect of an industry downsizing over decades as compared to immediately is not so hard to take in relation to jobs and tax revenue. However the solution to this dilemma has spawned other dilemmas. One such dilemma is the industry has been forced to spend millions on educating the public on the danger of their product while also making the product appealing. Another dilemma is that the U.S. population may be educated on the dangers of smoking other countries, especially third world countries, are not so educated. Conclusion The utilitarian approach is very popular, has its basis in historical established theory and is fair to the greatest number. I agree with the method because it is very democratic. I do not believe it is the best approach for every dilemma but for certain situation it works. It seems to fit better when many individuals will be affected by the action. In corporations and organizations this will probably hold true quite often. Thus this is why I believe it is a good fit for the business industry.

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

References: Driver, J., (2009). The history of utilitarianism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (Summer Ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/utilitarianism-history/. Johnson, C. E., (2005). Meeting the ethical challenge of leadership: Casting light or shadow (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kemerling, G., (2006). Utilitarianism. Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5q.htm. Nantel, J., & Weeks, W. A. (1996). Marketing ethics: Is there more to it than the utilitarian approach?. European Journal of Marketing, 30(5), 9-19. Retrieved from Argosy University Online Library EBSCOhost. Richardson, J. E., (2011). Annual editions: Business ethics (22 Ed.). New York, NY: McGrawHill. Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., & Meyer, M. (1989). Calculating consequences: The utilitarian approach to ethics. Issues in Ethics, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/calculating.html.