Chapter 5. General Ethical Perspectives

Chapter 5. General Ethical Perspectives

Utilitarianism: Do the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of People

Utilitarianism is based on the premise that ethical choices should be based on their consequences.

Utilitarianism is attempting to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Utility can be based on what is best in a specific case (act utilitarianism) or on what is generally best in most contexts (rule utilitarianism).

© 2015 SAGE Publications, Inc.

Utilitarianism

4 steps to conducting a utilitarian analysis of an ethical problem:

1. Clearly identify the action or issue under consideration.

2. Specify all those who might be affected by the action (e.g., the organization, the local community, a professional group, society), not just those immediately involved in the situation.

3. Determine the good and bad consequences for those affected.

4. Sum the good and the bad consequences.


Utilitarianism

Applications of Utilitarianism

Build on your prior experience

Carefully examine the outcomes of your decisions

Set personal interests aside

Recognize when weighing consequences is critical


Utilitarianism

Cautions of Utilitarianism

Consequences are difficult to identify, measure, and evaluate

There may be unanticipated outcomes

Decision makers reach different conclusions


Kant’s Categorical Imperative

In sharp contrast to the utilitarians, European philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that people should do what is morally right no matter the consequences.

Kant’s reasoning was the best-know example of deontological ethics: Deontological ethicists argue that we ought to

make choices based on our dutyAccording to Kant, what is right for one is right

for all.



Applications of Kant’s Categorical Imperative

Be duty bound

Always ask if you would want everyone to make the same choice

Demonstrate respect for others



Cautions of Kant’s Categorical Imperative

Exceptions exist to nearly every “universal” law

Moral obligations may conflict with one another

Is demonstrated through unrealistic examples

Hard to apply, particularly under stress


Justice as Fairness

According to Harvard philosopher John Rawls we should follow these principles of justice and build them into our social institutions:

Principle 1: Each person has an equal right to the same basic liberties that are compatible with similar liberties for all.

Principle 2: Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions: (A) They are to be attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. (B) They are to provide the greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society.


Justice as Fairness

Veil of Ignorance If a group stands behind a veil of ignorance they

will choose: (a) equal liberty, because they would want the

maximum amount of freedom to pursue their interests;

(b) equal opportunity, because if they turned out to be the most talented members of society, they would probably land the best jobs and elected offices;

(c) the difference principle, because they would want to be sure they were cared for if they ended up disadvantaged.


Justice as Fairness

Applications of this model

Follow fairness guidelines

Weigh both individual freedom and the good of the community when decision making

Step behind the veil of ignorance when making choices


Justice as Fairness

Cautions of this model:

Principles can be applied only to democratic societies

Groups disagree about the meaning of justice and fairness

Lack of consensus about the most important rights


Pragmatism: Ethics as Inquiry

Pragmatism was the dominant philosophical movement in the United States from the Civil War through World War II.

John Dewey (1859-1952) emerged as its most prominent spokesperson.

Dewey and other pragmatists believed that scientific methods could be applied to solving human dilemmas.

Dewey argued that ethical dilemmas should be approached scientifically as well.



The term “dramatic rehearsal” describes mental imagination in action. In dramatic rehearsal, decision makers conduct a series of imaginary thought experiments to visualize how their decisions could turn out.

While Dewey focused on the process of ethical decision-making, he also believed that every ethical decision must be made with an end or value in mind.



Applications of Pragmatism

Approach ethical problems like other dilemmas Immerse yourself in the details of the situation Engage your imagination Acknowledge your limitations Look for creative solutions Embrace your emotions Recognize that your ethical choices shape your

character



Cautions of Pragmatism

Lacks a moral center

Can lead to undesirable decisions

Vague outcomes


Focus on Follower Ethics

According to Harvard University political scientist, Barbara Kellerman there are guidelines that can be employed to encourage followers to serve the greater good by resisting bad leaders:

Be informed. Be engaged. Be independent. Be a watchdog. Be prepared to analyze and judge the situation, the

leader, and the other followers.


Follower Ethics

Kellerman’s guidelines (cont’d) Be open to allies and to forming coalitions. Be prepared to be different. Be prepared to take a stand. Be loyal to the group, not to any single individual. Know the slippery slope—bad leaders who over time

become more deeply embedded and more difficult to uproot.

Know your options. Know the risk of doing something—and of doing nothing. Check your moral compass.


Altruism

Advocates of altruism argue that love of neighbor is the ultimate ethical standard.

Our actions should be designed to help others whatever the personal cost.

The command to love God and to love others as we love ourselves is our most important obligation in Judeo-Christian ethics.

Concern for others promotes healthy social relationships.

Researchers from social psychology, economics, political science, and other fields have discovered that altruistic behavior is more often than not the norm, not the exception.


Altruism

Management professors Rabindra Kanungo and Manuel Mendonca believe that concern for others is even more important for leaders than it is for followers.

According to Kanungo and Mendonca, leaders intent on benefiting followers will pursue organizational goals, rely on referent and expert power bases, and give power away.

Leaders intent on benefiting themselves will focus on personal achievements; rely on legitimate, coercive, and reward power bases; and try to control followers.


Altruism

Terms: Individual-focused altruistic behaviors include

providing training, technical assistance, and mentoring. Group-focused altruistic behaviors include team

building, participative group decision-making, and minority advancement programs.

Organizational-focused altruistic attitudes and actions include demonstrating commitment and loyalty, protecting organizational resources, and whistle-blowing.

Societal-focused altruistic behaviors include making contributions to promote social welfare, reducing pollution, ensuring product safety, and maintaining customer satisfaction.


Leadership at the Movies: Radio

Discussion Questions:

What event in Coach Jones’ life prompted him to reach out to Radio?

Who gained the most from their relationship--the Coach or Radio?

Were players, students and family members hurt because the coach invested so much time in Radio? What limits should leaders set on the amount of time and effort they invest in the lives of followers?


Ethics of Care

Philosopher Virginia Held identifies five key components of the care ethic: Focuses on the importance of noting and meeting the

needs of those we are responsible for. Values emotions. Specific needs and relationships take priority above

universal principles. Breaks down the barriers between the public and

private spheres. Views persons as both relational and interdependent.


Case Study: The Asian Carp


What is the lesser of two evils?

Shutting down the canal locks to prevent the spread of the Asian carp or keeping the locks open? Why?


Case Study: Fukushima 50

Discussion Questions: If the explosions had occurred in another country, do you

think workers would have stayed on the job? Why or why not?

Can you think of other examples of where people risked their lives out of a sense of duty? What explains their actions?

In addition to duty, what other ethical principles appeared to motivate the 50, those who joined their efforts, and other Japanese citizens?

How should Japan and the world honor those who stayed to save the plant?

What leadership and followership ethics lessons do you take from this case?


Case Study: Drone Wars


Should the United States continue to use drones in its fight against terrorism? If so, what changes, if any, should be made in the way the drone program operates?


Documents

Chapter 5. General Ethical Perspectives