Business Meta-Ethics: An Analysis of Two Theories

Abstract

Abstract:The main purpose of this paper is to defend traditional ethical theory (utilitarianism and deontology) for its application in business against a more recent model consisting of utility, rights, and justice. This is done in three parts: First, we provide a conceptual argument for the superiority of the traditional model; second, we demonstrate these points through an examination of three short cases; and third, we argue for the capability of the traditional model to account for universais and particulars in ethics.

Paradigms Linked: A Normative-Empirical Dialogue about Business Ethics

“…Here, managerial professionals' beliefs appear to be in direct conflict with the notion of morality defined by ethical egoism. More importantly, the emergence of this factor as a key determinant of ethical work behaviour further affirms the fundamental assumption of all principle-based normative theories that ethics requires refraining from self-interest (e.g., Brady and Dunn, 1995;Velasquez, 1982Velasquez, , 1996. The last factor was named "Principlism or conscience."…”

“…Answers to this question directly concern the relative position of the moral standards espoused by different normative theories. Several moral philosophers have identified the teleology-deontology division as representing the most dominant polarization in the philosophy of morality (e.g., Brady and Dunn 1995;Goodpaster, 1985). While recent moral philosophy collectively considers utility, justice, rights as key aspects of morality, it has not specifically prescribed the relative importance of each constituent in overall considerations of morality.…”

Managerial Responsibility as Negotiated Order: A Social Construction Perspective

“…To them, the common good was better served by having the company promptly file for bankruptcy so that each employee could collect unemployment benefits. This dichotomy reflects Brady and Dunn's (1995) position that business ethics approaches can be broken down in just two categories, the ethics of duties and the ethics of utility.…”

“…The traditional answer has been that a responsible decision is simply one that conforms to some a priori set of principles. For example, Kantian ethics would emphasize stakeholder rights and duties, utilitarianism would focus on consequences, and most other approaches could be taken as variants of these two classical alternatives (Brady and Dunn 1995). This normative conceptualization of ethical decision making has largely dominated the field since the 1980s (Cavanagh et al 1995;Hunt and Vitell 1986;Jones 1991;Rest 1986;Treviño 1986).…”

Loyalty as a matter of principle: the influence of standards of judgment on customer loyalty

“…While recent research has argued that most individuals tend to have a consistent standard of judgment that lies somewhere between strictly principle-focused deontology and purely outcome-focused utilitarianism (Brady 1990;Brady and Wheeler 1996;Brady and Dunn 1995;Brady 1985;Burton et al 2006;Dunn 2010, 2011), these two standards are distinct from one another and should instead be treated as independent constructs.…”