In Unit 2 We Further Explored Ethical Decision Making

In Unit 2 We Further Explored The Ethical Decision Making Model That

In Unit 2, we further explored the ethical decision-making model that we were introduced to at the end of Unit 1. If you would like to review ethical decision-making models, read this article. Please note that this article is optional. Consider the following scenario: You are the manager of a local department store when you see a customer with her baby stealing baby formula. You are walking the aisles, checking inventory when you come around the corner and see this situation.

The customer puts the baby formula in a bag under the baby seat in the basket. The customer does not see you and continues to shop. Using the ethical decision-making approaches we have been discussing, respond to the following questions: Based on your ethical decision-making preferences and the ethical-decision making approaches, how would you respond in this situation? Identify and explain which of the ethical decision-making approaches you used to arrive at your decision. If you saw your neighbor stealing clothes for herself, would you respond differently to the situation? Why or why not?

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presented involves witnessing shoplifting, which raises important ethical questions about how to respond. Ethical decision-making models provide structured approaches to analyze such dilemmas, guiding individuals toward actions aligned with their moral principles and societal norms. In this context, my response hinges upon the application of specific ethical frameworks, primarily the utilitarian approach and the rights-based approach, each offering distinct reasoning paths.

Firstly, utilitarianism focuses on the outcomes and the overall happiness or unhappiness generated by an action. From this perspective, intervening when witnessing shoplifting could prevent future thefts, protect the store's resources, and reinforce a culture of honesty, ultimately benefiting the broader community. Conversely, confronting the customer could lead to potential conflict or embarrassment for her, possibly inciting negative repercussions. Therefore, the utilitarian approach may support reporting or addressing the theft to maximize positive outcomes for the majority involved.

Alternatively, the rights-based approach emphasizes respecting individuals' rights and dignity. In this scenario, the customer has the right to be treated fairly, and the store has the obligation to uphold its policies against theft. As a manager, my duty would be to ensure that the store's property is protected, which might necessitate confronting the customer or notifying security. This approach concentrates on adhering to legal and organizational rights, even if it means certain negative consequences for the individual involved.

When evaluating these approaches, I am inclined to prioritize a combination of ethical principles: observing the utilitarian aim of deterring theft and promoting overall honesty, alongside respecting the store's rights and policies. Hence, my response would be to discreetly alert security or management staff, allowing them to handle the situation appropriately. This action aligns with the ethical decision-making model that balances societal benefits and respect for individual rights.

If I encountered my neighbor stealing clothes for herself, my response might differ due to the personal relationship involved. While I would still recognize the importance of upholding legal and moral standards, the personal connection could evoke feelings of empathy or a desire to address the issue privately. In such a case, I might consider speaking directly with my neighbor or encouraging her to seek assistance, depending on the circumstances. However, I would still prioritize maintaining ethical integrity and ensuring that the alleged theft is addressed in a manner consistent with moral and legal expectations.

In conclusion, ethical decision-making in situations of theft involves careful consideration of outcomes, rights, and personal relationships. Applying a balanced approach that considers both utilitarian and deontological principles helps guide actions toward fairness, justice, and societal well-being, whether in professional or personal contexts.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Crane, T. (2014). Ethical Decision-Making in Business: A Guide to Building Ethical Practice. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(3), 403-423.
• Kidder, R. M. (2005). Managing Ethical Behavior. Harvard Business Review, 83(7), 124-131.
• Johnson, C. E. (2020). Ethical Challenges in Business (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Resnik, D. B. (2018). The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects: Protecting People, Advancing Science, Promoting Trust. Springer.
• Silva, M. (2017). Ethical Decision-Making and Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 146(2), 223-234.
• Tronto, J. C. (2013). Caring Democracy: Markets, Equality, and Justice. New York University Press.
• Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., & Meyer, M. J. (2015). Moral Reasoning: Tests of the Dilemma Profile and Ethical Decision-Making. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 529-543.
• Wallace, R. S. (2016). The Moral Significance of Business. Routledge.
• Williams, R. (2019). Business Ethics: A Practical Guide. Routledge.