Deontology Should Govern Decision Making in Business

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2 2. Decision make in argument 2 3. Characteristics of deontology . 3 4. Arguments in favour of applying deontology in business 4 5. Arguments against applying deontology in business 6. decision 9 References 9 Deontology should govern decision reservation in business. Discuss. 1. Introduction Boylan (2000 2) refers to groovys as the science concerning the undecomposed and wrong of human meet. Teleology and deontology ar the two major(ip) schools of thought that dominate honorable decision- fashioning in the condition of business.Teleology refers to consequences and is founded on the principle of utility maximisation. This concept judges behaviour by its effects on the overall welf be of all s driveholders. Deontology, on the opposite(a) hand, views consequences as stakeary. Under this philosophy, decisions and acts be evaluated in terms of their intrinsic worth. Deontology is much demanding than teleology, because it rates decisions a nd acts in absolute terms. For example, even if a decision or action satisfies the rule of the majority, deontology would reject that articular option if, as a result of it, a minority of stakeholders atomic number 18 homogeneously to suffer. 2. Decision devising in business When business firms are charged with infractions, and when there is lawful investigation on the managers of those firms, there is a concern raised closely deterrent example behavior in business. Hence, the level of trust, which is adept of the foundations of the business environment, is threatened. In fact, managers often have to make decisions under economic, professional and social pressure. The decision- make bear on impart always present ethical challenges. Is this the right thing to do?This question is the essence of the ethical dilemma for any decision shaper in todays corporations. A collection of factors depart be taken in thoughtfulness in answering to this question. Is it right for the p ut together? Is it right for the shareholders? Is it right for the hostel? For the customers? For the decision maker himself? Indeed, business spate have many a(prenominal) sources of ethical theories to choose from when making decisions. Each honourable system fall outs a unique perspective on different situations. Managers and business sufferers use these guidelines to act in fair and socially responsible ways.The fusee rules about which a decision maker will divvy up are therefore highly dependent on the moral begin. 3. Characteristics of deontology Deontology animals itself on the intrinsic worth of the decision or act. No allowance is made for wrong conduct under this philosophy. A business manager, who accepts deontology, will hold that some(prenominal) moral principles are binding, regardless of the consequences. Deontological morality is the opposite of consequential moral philosophy. The moral person does his vocation regardless of the consequences.If a mana ger takes a deontological approach to ethics, he defines his job by asking What is the world(a) principle to be followed? Deontological ethics refers to an established source of ethics guidance, such as diligence standard or an official code of company conduct. In fact, Immanuel Kant beautiful deontological ethics and posited that the disposition of morality is to do 1s duty even when we are not inclined to do it, and not because we are afraid of the consequences of not doing it. Kant referred to deontology as the categorical jussive mood.Under this principle, a moral jussive mood must be categorical or absolute, providing a lasting power to adopt a particular course of action, categorized as right or ethical. The rationale skunk the principle of deontology is that each action has intrinsic worth and unconditional value. Ferrell et al. (2008) refer to deontology as non-consequentialism, ethical formalism, or ethics of respect-for-persons. The principle of deontology state s that decisions should be judged on the circum attitudes in which they are made, rather than by their consequences.Deontology is the study of duty. In philosophy, it core specifically ethics ground on duty regardless of consequences. Deontological ethics refers to rules stated in terms of other features of the courses of action, notably whether they represent fulfillment of an agreement or other duty or right, and/or involve the interactment of others with collectible respect. Since human beings have free will and thus are subject to act from laws infallible by designer, Kant believed they have dignity or a value beyond price. Thus, wholeness human being foundationnot use another(prenominal) entirely to satisfy his or her own interests.This is the core insight behind Kants second facial expression of the categorical imperative Always treat the humanity in a person as an end and never as a means merely. What are the implications of this formulation of the categorical imp erative for business? 4. Arguments in favour of applying deontology in business The deontological theory states that flock should adhere to their obligations and duties when analyzing an ethical dilemma. This means that the person will take into consideration his obligations to other people involved and the edict at large when winning a decision thus fulfilling his duty which is considered ethically correct.A deontologist will never break a promise made to other parties. He will never to do something that is against the law. Thus a deontologist will be real consistent in his decision making which will be based on duty of the soul. Deontology provides the basis for special duty towards other individuals like your family members. For example, older children have a special duty of protection and care for their younger siblings, in the absence of parents older children are expected to take due care of the younger ones preventing them in doing things that may cause hurt to themselve sDeontology also praises those who do an act of supererogation this is when someone exceeds his duties and obligations towards other persons or the society at large. For example, in case of a cease in a building, someone may go inside the building on flack risking his own life to save the lives of others. His duty would have been to call the fire services where fireman are equipped to handle this situation except if instead of waiting for the firemen , he exceeds his duty by saving other people himself. It should be pointed out that the respect for persons principle does not revoke commercial transactions.No one is used as merely a means in a voluntary economic exchange where both parties benefit. What this formulation of the categorical imperative does do is to put some constraints on the nature of economic transactions. Another concern about contemporary business make out is the extent to which employees have very limited knowledge about the personal business of the company . In an economic view, a Kantian approach to business ethics terminology, there is high information asymmetry in the midst of management and the employees.Wherever one side has information that it keeps from other side, there is a severe enticement for abuse of power and deception. A Kantian would look for ways to cast down the information asymmetry between management and employees. In practical terms, a Kantian would endorse the practice known as open discussion management. The adoption of practices like open book management would go farthest toward correcting the asymmetrical information that managers possess, a situation that promotes abuse of power and deception. open up book management lso enhances employee self-respect. For a Kantian, meaningful work * is freely chosen and provides opportunities for the worker to exercise autonomy on the job * supports the autonomy and moderateness of human beings work that lessens autonomy or that undermines rationality is immoral * p rovides a salary sufficient to exercise independence and provide for physical eudaimonia and the satisfaction of some of the workers desires * enables a worker to step-up rational capacities and * does not interfere with a workers moral development. . Arguments against applying deontology in business Management, by rendering, is the planning, leading, organizing and controlling available imagerys to achieve goals and objectives. Hence, one of the basic functions of management, controlling, is according to Harold Koontz, the measurement and correction of performance in order to make sure that enterprise objectives and the plans devised to attain them are accomplished. Consequently, it is largely based on outcomes and accountability of the business.Managers are therefore required to be responsible towards achieving their objectives and one of the ways to achieve this is by analyzing whether their actions are in line with expected outcomes and henceforth modify their future deci sion making process accordingly. In fact, this function is considered as one of the fundamental scene of management and deriving from this will give rise to a major shortcoming in management decisions. Relying on universalism and good will of managers will not be enough in management decision making to achieve the vision, goals and objectives set by the organisation.Deontology requires that managers decisions be based on duty instead of consequences and must be followed for its own sake irrespective of the outcome. such stance is considered as inflexible. It should be noted that norms vary from culture to culture, society to society and even people to people. Consequently having a rigid stance in respect of decisions may not be the best chess opening for managers. The definition of right and wrong will depend on the culture, individual or historical period.Decisions taken in particular societies might be considered as ethical while in others as non-ethical. In this context, it is easier to deduct why, when faced with the requirement to select a model of how we ought to live our lives, many people choose the idea of ethical relativism, where that ethical principles are outlined by the traditions of their society, their personal opinions, and the circumstances of the present moment. The idea of relativism implies some form of flexibility as opposed to strict black-and-white rules.From this perspective, it is better for managers to base their decision as a result of interactions with individuals and social institutions. Moreover, by definition an organization comprise a group of people with common objectives. No organization would be able to survive without its people such as owners who risk their money in the business, employees who provide the mental and physical efforts required for successful working of the business or managers who are involved in the daily operations of the organization.Managers know that without its people there wont be any organizatio n. Hence, recognizing the stakes of such stakeholders is sometimes fundamental for the excerption of the company. Sticking to a rule based approach as proposed by deontology might not help in certain cases where human resource for instance is involved. Care based-theorists seek solutions to ethical challenges on a single basis. To do otherwise means applying a blunt instrument across all situations (Hovland & Wolburg, 2012).They recognize that their approach requires stepping out of a comfort partition of infallible rules, but because it is grounded in human relationships, their approach is more seeming to find solutions based on fairness (Hovland & Wolburg, 2012). Care-based theorists assume that humans are interdependent and need others for survival (Tronto 1993), that moral reason involves the interplay between emotions and reason (Noddings 2003 Held 1993), and that moral solutions must work for people within the context in which they live (Slattery et al. n press). In 1970, Nobel Prize winning economist, Milton Friedman published an expression under the provocative title The social responsibility of business is to increase shekels where he posited that the managers fiduciary responsibility is to make profits since it is the main(prenominal) reason behind the setting up of firms. He added that distancing from such objectives would simply mean a theft towards shareholders(Crane and Matten 2004).Hence, he vigorously favoured the philosophy that firms should only aim towards profit maximizing and any other responsibility can only be considered if firms achieve their main objective. If we look at the ethical egoism principle which stipulates that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be chastely right that it maximize ones self-interest, we can see that there is link between these two philosophies. Egoism differs in content from deontological theories such as Kantianism which give weight to the interests of others (Stanford Encyclopedia, 2012 ).Abiding to deontology in decision making and favouring any other considerations than that of the shareholders own interests would simply mean drawing away from ethical egoism and hence would considered as a theft out of their pocket. On the other hand, Edward Freeman, who was one of the founding fathers of the stakeholder theory, challenged the idea of Friedman that the main responsibility of business was to maximize profits without any considerations for the interests of all those affected by the business, including customers, suppliers, employees, and, of course, stockholders.There are two principles key the stakeholder theory (Crane and Matten 2004) * Principle of corporate rights which requires that a corporation should not queer the rights of others to achieve theirs and * Principle of corporate effect which requires that business should be accountable of the effect or impact on other parties. However, if we analyze the second principle, it is clear that it is drawn from th e utilitarianism philosophy which considers morality on the basis of consequences of actions and the maximization of good to all sections of the society (Greenwood and De Cieri, 2005).Based on this principle of corporate effect, making decisions only on a sense of duty or universal principles may not necessarily give rise to the greatest good to the greatest number of parties and will be in contradiction to the Stakeholder Theory. 6. Conclusion The perceived weaknesses of deontological theories have lead some scholars to consider how to eliminate or at least reduce those weaknesses while preserving deontologys advantages. One way to do this is to embrace both consequentialism and deontology, combining them into some kind of a commingle theory.Given the differing notions of rationality underlying each kind of theory, this is however a challenging task. References Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Center for the Study of Language and Information, StanfordUniversity, Stanford,CA9 4305 http//www. bio. davidson. edu/people/kabernd/indep/carainbow/Theories. htm http//atheism. about. com/od/ethicalsystems/a/Deontological. htm http//www. ehow. com/about_6686029_role-business-ethics-decision- king. htmlixzz2AatMlvUJ