WBA August 2014 BBM 406 Business Values And Ethics Instructi

Wba August 2014 Bbm 406 Business Values And Ethicsinstructionsread Th

WBA AUGUST 2014 BBM 406: BUSINESS VALUES AND ETHICS INSTRUCTIONS Read the following case carefully and answer the questions that follow. “ETHICAL DILEMMA”— A company that fabricates heat exchangers, which shall be called ABC for the purposes of not exposing it to an unwarranted audit, became aware in 2007 through an associational membership meeting that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had enacted a new standard. This new standard, called Chromium VI, established a new action level for Hexavalent Chromium that affected all fabricators of alloy metals. The company soon afterwards contacted their outside safety consultants, in whom they entrusted their safety program, and asked about specifics of the new standard.

It is important to note that the outside consultants also represented other metal fabricators who made heat exchangers. The consultant group began looking further into the new requirement on behalf of their clients. Unfortunately, for the next year, there was very little education or direction from the outside consultants and very little communication regarding the health issues and enforcement penalties that could occur if found non-compliant by OSHA (OSHA, 2009). They also were lacking in providing timely industrial hygiene monitoring. In May of 2008, ABC hired an internal Safety Coordinator who also shared duties in Quality Inspection.

One of the first projects assigned to the Safety Coordinator was to investigate the new Chromium VI standard and provide direction on how to comply. The Safety Coordinator had extensive safety experience in other industries, which allowed him the capability to approach this new learning experience with a satisfactory background. There were several ethical dilemmas that had to be thought through. Conversations on the subject included presenting facts as well as the morality of the situation with shop management and upper management. The Safety Coordinator had to convince all of the decision makers of the moral need to comply fully with the standard.

Paper For Above instruction

The ethical dilemmas faced by ABC in August 2014 regarding compliance with OSHA’s Chromium VI standard exemplify complex moral and strategic challenges companies often confront when implementing safety protocols. Such dilemmas require comprehensive approaches grounded in ethical theories and organizational morality to facilitate responsible decision-making. This essay discusses various approaches to resolving these dilemmas, including utilitarianism, deontological ethics, virtue ethics, and stakeholder theory. Additionally, it examines the role of morality in company operations, considering how a moral system guides acceptable behavior and fosters a positive organizational culture.

Approaches to Solving Ethical Dilemmas in ABC

One primary approach to resolving ethical dilemmas in corporate settings is utilitarianism, which advocates for actions that maximize overall happiness or welfare. In the context of ABC, a utilitarian approach would weigh the benefits of compliance—ensuring employee safety, avoiding legal penalties, and protecting corporate reputation—against the costs associated with implementing new standards, such as financial investment and operational adjustments (Bentham, 1789; Mill, 1863). From this perspective, full compliance with OSHA standards is morally justified because it enhances the well-being of employees and minimizes the risk of harm, which ultimately benefits the organization and society at large.

Conversely, deontological ethics emphasize duties and moral rules that must be followed irrespective of consequences. Applying deontology, ABC’s obligation is to adhere to legal standards like OSHA’s regulations because compliance is a moral duty rooted in respect for law and human safety (Kant, 1785). This approach would argue that the company has a duty to act ethically simply because the right action aligns with moral principles, such as honesty and integrity, rather than solely focusing on outcomes. The Safety Coordinator’s push for full compliance reflects a deontological perspective that moral duty should guide corporate behavior.

Virtue ethics, originating from Aristotle, shift the focus from rules or consequences to the character and virtues of the decision-maker. In this case, virtues such as honesty, responsibility, and courage are crucial. The Safety Coordinator’s moral stance underscores the importance of integrity and moral courage—to stand against potential corporate resistance and advocate for health and safety out of virtuous character (Aristotle, 4th century BCE). Implementing standards ethically, from this view, involves cultivating an organizational culture that values virtue-driven decision-making, which fosters long-term trust and moral excellence.

Stakeholder theory emphasizes the importance of considering all parties affected by corporate decisions, including employees, management, regulators, shareholders, and the community. ABC’s dilemma involves balancing the interests of these stakeholders—protecting worker health versus operational costs, and ensuring legal compliance versus potential reputation risks. Ethical resolution involves transparent communication with stakeholders, prioritizing health and safety, and aligning organizational actions with societal expectations (Freeman, 1984). The Safety Coordinator’s role could involve engaging stakeholders in dialogue to create mutually beneficial solutions that uphold ethical standards.

The Purpose of Morality in a Company

Morality within a corporate context serves as a guiding framework that delineates acceptable behaviors and fosters a culture of integrity. The statement that “the moral system of a company forbids certain behavior and enjoins certain behavior as right,” underscores that companies are not only economic entities but also moral entities that influence societal values. Morality ensures that corporations operate ethically, reflecting values such as honesty, justice, responsibility, and respect for human dignity (Donaldson & Werhane, 2008).

In the case of ABC, morality functions as a moral compass that guides decision-makers toward actions that protect employees from harm, even if such actions may incur costs or challenge short-term profits. The company’s moral system enforces compliance with OSHA’s standards, illustrating its commitment to safeguarding employee well-being and adhering to societal norms (Schneider & Ingram, 2013). A strong moral foundation also enhances the organization’s reputation, builds trust with stakeholders, and contributes to sustainable long-term success (Ferrell et al., 2019).

Furthermore, morality within a company shapes organizational culture, influencing behaviors, policies, and practices. When leadership demonstrates moral integrity—such as ensuring safety regulations are followed—this fosters an environment where ethical conduct is valued and replicated across all levels. Malpractices or neglect of ethical standards, like disregarding safety regulations for cost savings, undermine organizational trust and can lead to legal penalties and public backlash (Hartman, 2017). Therefore, morality acts as both a safeguard and a catalyst for responsible corporate governance, aligning business objectives with societal expectations.

Conclusion

The ethical challenges faced by ABC regarding the Chromium VI standard highlight the importance of adopting multifaceted approaches—utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, and stakeholder theory—to arrive at morally sound decisions. These approaches emphasize different facets of moral reasoning but converge on the goal of promoting safety, integrity, and social responsibility within the organization. Morality’s vital purpose in the corporate sphere is to guide acceptable behavior, foster organizational trust, and uphold societal values, ensuring that companies contribute positively to the community while achieving their economic objectives.

References

• Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford University Press.
• Donaldson, T., & Werhane, P. H. (2008). Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach. Pearson Education.
• Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2019). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases. Cengage Learning.
• Freedom, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing.
• Hartman, L. P. (2017). Business ethics: Decision making for personal integrity and social responsibility. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• OSHA. (2009). Occupational Safety and Health Standards for Hexavalent Chromium. U.S. Department of Labor.
• Schneider, M., & Ingram, H. (2013). Public policy and the moral foundation of organizations. Public Administration Review, 73(3), 363-377.
• Aristotle. (4th century BCE). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by W. D. Ross.