Ethics and Organisations

Explain what we mean by moral imagination         (weighting 25%)

How can it be helpful to consider moral imagination in the context of stakeholder theory?          (weighting 25%)

[TOTAL WEIGHTING: 50%]

How does Rawls’ and Sandel’s critique of meritocracy help us rethink our attitudes towards success and failure in contemporary society?         (weighting 30%)

What implications does this rethinking have for our understanding of freedom?

(weighting 20%)

[TOTAL WEIGHTING: 50%]

Explain Sen’s critique of Adam Smith                    (weighting 20%)

Provide some examples of public goods               (weighting 10%)

Drawing on Sandel’s writing, consider what might happen to these goods in a marketized economy?                       (weighting 20%)

[TOTAL WEIGHTING: 50%]

Consider the limitations of Bentham’s utilitarianism by drawing on Mill and Kant

(weighting 25%)

Explain how their understandings of freedom are different

(weighting 25%)

[TOTAL WEIGHTING: 50%]

Exam Ends

Date: Monday 13th May 2024

Exam Start Time: 09:30 BST

This is the time the Takeaway Paper will be released in Canvas

Exam End Date and Time: Tuesday 14th May 2024 09:30 BST

This is the due date in your Direct Assessment Timetable and when the Canvas link closes; meaning you will no longer able to submit after this time

Exam duration: This TAP has a notional ‘work time’ of up to 8 hours.

SEE EXAM INSTRUCTIONS OVERLEAF!

Candidates should attempt two of four questions

(All questions are equally weighted)

The suggested word count is 1400 words

Use Harvard Referencing Style

We live in a dual-moral society We live in a dual-moral society (Hendry, 2004) Two kinds of morality a) traditional morality of obligation to others b) self-interested market morality

However, this statement raises the question of what happens if people are emotionally and possibly geographically distant from us.

- Growing inequality leads to a situation in which different social groups

increasing inequality leads to increased separation between different social groups.

 Empathy is a feeling behaviour

You believe what other people feel

Experience what they experience.

Against Empathy (Paul

Bloom, 2016)

But we are more likely to empathise with those who are close to us, those who are similar to us.

Those who are close to us, those who are similar to us, and those we find more attractive or more vulnerable and less scary

Contracts of Exchange - Exchange Justice

Exchange justice: fairness between individuals in the exchange of goods and the fulfilment of contractual obligations

Fairness in the exchange and fulfilment of contractual obligations.

Classical ethical theories

Utilitarianism: the idea that a person's life is worth more than his or her life

Classical ethical theories

1) Consequentialism (Purposivism) - Purpose Orientation.

Considers the goal or outcome of an action to determine whether the action is right or wrong.

Actions are right or wrong.

2) Non-consequentialist (teleological) - Principle orientated. Use rules and

use rules and principles to guide decisions.

3) Moral-Ethical - Bound by neither consequences nor rules. Environmental and

personal factors are important in determining actions.

Utilitarianism and Organisations

"Utilitarianism is a planning ethic. How can we be rational if we do not consider consequences?

consequences? Jones et al (2005)

The ideas put forward by Bentham are relevant to people living in organised societies.

Bentham makes a number of points that are very relevant to people living in organised societies, people working in organisations.

These decisions affect many people.

1) Provide justification for making decisions that adversely affect some people.

1) Provide reasons for making decisions that adversely affect some people. Business managers often have to make difficult decisions that are detrimental to everyone.

Criticisms of Utilitarianism

a) Hedonism - based on the pursuit of pleasure

Is there no higher purpose in life than pleasure?

But pleasure can include intellectual, emotional and imaginative pleasures, friendship, love and trust.

and the pleasures of imagination, friendship, love and trust.

Bentham - All pleasures, whether physical or intellectual, are of equal value and can be reduced to "pleasure."

Bentham - All pleasures, whether physical or intellectual, are of equal value and can be lumped together.

J.S. Mill - The different qualities of pleasure

Criticism of Utilitarianism

b) The question of boundaries - Where should the line be drawn?

Where should they be drawn?

Who does the greatest number of people include?

Number?

d) May lead to injustice to individuals

- Introduce a critique of utilitarianism:

1. does not respect the rights of the individual. For utilitarians, the individual

For utilitarians, the individual is important, but only insofar as each individual's preferences

should be counted along with the preferences of others (P57-58).

2. a common currency of value. Bentham argues that

Bentham that it is possible to count pleasure and pain. However, "is it possible to

convert all moral goods into a single currency of value without losing something in the process of conversion?

The highest end of human life - the full and free development of human faculties.

The full and free development of human faculties. In Mill's view, conformity is the enemy of the best way of life.

The enemy of the best way of life.

, the moral imagination is a social process that

combines moral sensitivity with the drive for collective action.

motivation for collective action.

"Imaginative solutions to moral dilemmas are not created by inspired individuals alone.

Rather, they emerge from pluralistic processes in which multiple participants with opposing moral perspectives

in which multiple actors with opposing moral perspectives interact with each other, with no single actor in control of the situation."

Moral Imagination

can prevent ethical failures in business because it enables managers to

free managers from the mental models that normally influence their perceptions and decision-making.

The thinking patterns of

moral judgements as well. By imagining behaviour, a person

places the situation, interests, and values of others

values, thereby creating an emotion or passion.

passion. If this passion is the same as another's

Smith calls this phenomenon "sympathy".

"sympathy"), a pleasurable emotion is created,

and thus moral identity.

- When an entire society of individuals is engaged in imagination,

there is an imaginative viewpoint that is unifying, universal and normative,

universal and normative.

The organisation does not want to discuss these issues openly.

- Managers believe that talking about ethical issues hinders or distracts from responsible problem solving.

problem-solving. In this case, moral discourse is seen as presumptuous and confusing.

The highest purpose of human life - the full and free development of human capabilities.

1. without paternalism. Libertarians are opposed to passing laws to protect people

2. 2. no moral legislation. Libertarians oppose the use of the coercive power of the law to promote ideas of virtue or express moral convictions.

3. 3. no redistribution of income or wealth

According to Kant, only the second kind of behaviour is moral.

The moral value of an act lies not in its consequences but in its intentions.

The moral value of an act lies not in the consequences it produces but in the intention to do it.

A good intention is not good because of its consequences ...... It is good in itself

Human beings are unique in possessing the capacity for self-determination

a) the capacity to reason

b) the capacity to act intentionally (free action)

Criticisms of Kantianism

a) Theory is too narrow - only deals with universal obligations, e.g..

Telling the truth.

Does not cover special duties

E.g. employer to employee, producer to consumer.

Obligations to consumers.

b) Kant has no place for moral emotions or cares, and no information about

moral qualities.

c) It is absolute - no exceptions are allowed.

Accusation: 'moral pettiness'

Kantianism

Central point: it is our intentions that matter when making a

Decision-making.

Categorical imperative - the categorical imperative is the voice of our true rational self.

is the voice of our true rational self and is what we believe when we think rationally.

What we believe when we think rationally.

- The first maxim: "I should never act unless I can

Unless I also wish my maxims to become universal law." The second maxim: 'I should never act unless I am able to act unless I also wish my maxims to become universal law.'

- Second maxim: 'Whether you act towards yourself or towards others, act so

either to yourself or to others, always as an end in itself, and never as

merely a means."

- Freedom should not be viewed from the liberal perspective that

we should do whatever we want. Our freedom

We are free only when we act in accordance with our own nature.

We are slaves when we are governed by our own passions or the desires of others.

We are slaves when we are ruled by our passions or the desires of others.

Moral conflict is when a person has two moral obligations which cannot be fulfilled at the same time.

Two moral obligations that cannot be fulfilled at the same time.

Both are fulfilled at the same time. Underlying these obligations are conflicting

values. A moral dilemma is an unresolvable moral conflict, i.e., there is no completely satisfactory solution to the

conflict, i.e., there is no completely satisfactory solution.

Because all possible courses of action are

moral objections. Choose an example of a moral dilemma of your choice and use 500 words to describe it.

example of a moral dilemma of your choice and explain in 500 words why this dilemma is difficult to resolve,

Explain why this dilemma is difficult to resolve (25%).

BBC Moral maze

- Coronavirus

- There are different views on how

Different views on how the virus should be dealt with.

- Recorded in March 2020, just as a pandemic was beginning to take hold in the UK.

A pandemic is beginning to take hold in the UK.

- Should the state impose restrictions on

Should the state impose restrictions on people?

- Should the state impose restrictions on people?

Is there a trade-off between civil liberties and human life?

- How much government intervention is

acceptable?

- Should we value some lives over

Should we value some lives over others?

Answer the following questions in the breakout room

Answer the following questions

1. Write down two characteristics of 'utilitarianism'.

characteristics of 'utilitarianism'. Write down a quote from the podcast

Quotes from the podcast. You may also use virus-related

virus-related examples to illustrate your claim.

2. write two claims that characterise "Kantianism".

Kantian" characteristics. Please cite quotes from the podcast

quotes from the podcast to support your examples. You can also use virus-related

virus-related examples to illustrate your claims.

3. write two claims that are characterised by the 'libertarian'

liberal" characteristics. Please cite the podcast in

quotes from the podcast to support your examples. You may also use virus-related

virus-related examples to illustrate your claims.

4. what ideas do you agree with?

The principle of difference:

- Inequality is only permissible if it benefits the most disadvantaged in society.

Inequality is only permissible.

- For example, positive discrimination in recruitment - treating someone more favourably because they have a protected characteristic.

For example, positive discrimination in recruitment - treating someone more favourably because they have a protected characteristic.

Criticism of Rawls:

- High level of government intervention - there must be a way to regulate and decide who is favoured and who is disadvantaged.

And to decide who is advantaged and who is disadvantaged in a system.

- Over-emphasis on distribution of wealth - need to focus on wealth creation.

Mere Coalition ......

What is the purpose of politics?

- Politics is about developing virtues in citizens.

- Politics is about learning how to live a good life.

- The purpose of politics is to enable people to develop their

The purpose of politics is to enable people to develop their unique abilities and virtues - to deliberate on the common good, to acquire morality and virtue.

negotiate the common good, acquire moral and practical judgement, have the capacity for self-government, and the

capacity for self-governance, to care about the fate of society.

The fate of society.

What is the purpose of politics?

Those who contribute most to associations characterised by this (virtuous)

character' are those who excel in civic virtues, those who are

most adept at discussing the common good. Those who

are not the richest, nor the most numerous, nor the most handsome.

are not the richest, the most numerous or the most handsome, but those most deserving of political recognition.

- If I were to lie to you now, I would be saying more than just a few things

(a) My behaviour stems from my habits (my motives);

(b) I am shaping the character of our relationship;

(c) I am reinforcing my tendency to lie in the future (i.e., to miss your opportunities).

(c) I am reinforcing my tendency to lie in the future (i.e., missing deadlines).

- Moral theories can isolate and habitually focus on morally relevant features of behaviour.

Moral theories can isolate and habitually focus on morally relevant features of behaviour.

The whistleblower as a corporate safety net

It can be argued that the role of the whistleblower has become more important.

It can be argued that with

1) organisations becoming larger

2) Deregulation - less government regulation

Is the whistleblower a safety net when management and regulation fail?

Page

of 16

ZOOM

Revision
Lecture 11

The effect of
the markets on
public goods
• What problems are not addressed in the idea of
'self-interested' market exchange’? (the critique
of Adam’s Smith)
• 2) How does Sen define 'public good’?
• 3) What conditions need to be in place for the
motivation for exchange to be sustainable?

The effect
of the
markets on
public
goods
• The concern of the different parties with their
own interests certainly can adequately motivate
all of them to take part in the exchange from
which each benefits. Self-interest explains
motivation for exchange.
• The butcher-brewer-baker simplicity doesn’t
carry over to problems of production and
distribution (Smith never said that it did). In
addition, it doesn’t discuss what institutional
arrangements need to be in place for exchange
to be sustainable.

The effect
of the
markets on
public
goods
• To understand how exchange works in practice,
it is not adequate to concentrate only on the
motivation that makes people seek exchange. It
is necessary to look at the behaviour patterns
that could sustain a flourishing system of
mutually profitable exchanges.
• Rules and Trust are the conditions necessary for
the motivation for exchange to be sustainable.
• Mutual confidence in certain rules of behaviour
is typically implicit rather than explicit. However,
there are examples of deep-rooted scepticism
of the reliability and moral quality of business
behaviour. Establishing high standards of
business ethics is certainly one way of tacking
this problem.

The effect
of the
markets on
public
goods
• Sandel, M (2012) What Money Can't Buy:
The Moral Limits of Markets (Lecture 3).

What happens when markets don’t work when it comes
to morality?
• Sandel (2012) offers two reasons why markets should
not be trusted with strengthening moral values.
• Reason 1: Market morality and commercialisation
change the meanings of social practices
• Reason 2: Rising inequality leads to the increased
separation among different social groups and
therefore effects commonality.

Utilitarianism
• Mill objects to Bentham’s
“greatest happiness’’ principle as
it does not give adequate weight
to human dignity and individual
rights, and that it wrongly reduces
everything of moral importance to
a single scale of pleasure and pain.
• Overtime, he argues, respecting
individual liberty will lead tot the
greatest human happiness.
•

Mill’s
response to
Bentham
• Mill’s response could be seen as an attempt to
reconcile individual rights with the utilitarian
philosophy. In his book ‘On Liberty’ (1859) he
argues that people should be free to do whatever
they want, provided they do not harm others.
• Mills thinks we should maximize utility, not case by
case, but in the long run.
• Overtime, he argues, respecting individual liberty
will lead tot the greatest human happiness.

Why should we
assume that
upholding individual
liberty and the right to
dissent will promote
happiness?
1. Subjecting the conventions (prevailing opinion)
to a vigorous contest of ideas will prevent it
from hardening into dogma and prejudice.
2. A society, that forces its members to embrace
custom and convention is likely to fall into a
stultifying conformity, depriving itself of the
energy and vitality that prompt social
improvement.

Kantianism
Contrast 3 (reason)
Duty v. inclination
Autonomy v
heteronomy
Categorical v.
hypothetical
imperatives
Contrast 2 (freedom)
Contrast 1 (morality)

Moral
Imagination
• Read Hargrave (2009) ‘Moral imagination,
Collective Action, and the Achievement of
Moral outcomes’ Business Ethics Quarterly, 19
(1), 87-104
• How can we link it to stakeholder theory?

Moral
Imagination
• According to Hargreaves (2009) Moral imagination is
a social process – integration of moral sensitivities
with consideration of the dynamics of collective
action.
• “Imaginative solutions to ethical dilemmas are
not created whole-cloth by inspired individuals
working alone.......rather, they emerge from
pluralistic processes in which multiple actors with
opposing moral viewpoints interact, and no single
actor is in control.”
• Morally imaginative arrangements emerge
through dialectical processes, that are influenced
by actor’s relative power and political skill.
• His case is that for change to come about, there is
a need for pragmatic actors be engaged with (in
the words of Dewey) ‘creatively tapping a
situation’s possibilities’.

Rawls on
Rejection of
Merit
‘ We do not deserve our place in the distribution of
native endowments, any more that we deserve our
initial starting point in society. Or that we deserve
the superior character that enables us to make the
effort to cultivate our abilities is also problematic;
for such character depends in good part upon
fortunate family and social circumstances in early
life for which we can claim no credit. The notion of
desert (merit) does not apply here’.

Rawls on
Rejection of
Merit
• ‘The natural distribution is neither just nor
unjust; nor is it unjust that persons are born
into society at some particular position.
These are simply natural facts. What is just
and unjust is the way that institutions deal
with these facts’.
• Rawls proposes that we deal with these
facts by agreeing “to share one another’s
fate”.

Rawls on
Rejection of
Merit
Rawls rejects merit for two reasons:
a) My having the talents that enable me to
compete more successfully than others is not
entirely my own doing.
b) The qualities that a society happens to value at
any given time also morally arbitrary.

• Distributive justice is not a matter of rewarding
merit.
• Rawls makes an important but subtle distinction
between merit and what he calls ‘entitlements to
legitimate expectations’.
• The difference is: unlike a desert claim, an
entitlement can arise only once certain rules of the
game are in place. It can’t tell us how to set the
rules in the first place (i.e. state lottery).
• There can be a difference between who is entitled
to the winnings and who deserves to win.

• Ethics and Organisations