Case studies for business ethics

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • Case studies for business ethics
    • Nike: exploitation and child labour
      • Kant
        • Kant would argue that Nike are treating the children as a means to an end (profit). This is unacceptable and should not continue. With the categorical imperative, Nike's values cannot be universalised as it is unethical and cruel.
      • Utilitarianism
        • The long and short term benefits of this would be profit for Nike. However when weighting up pleasure VS pain, the amount of pain for the children being exploited is too much to justify using them as cheap labour.
      • Virtue ethics
      • Natural law and Christian ethics
        • Natural law: this directly violates the primary precept "protect and preserve human life." child labour is not only illegal but also puts children under stress that can effect them before they are fully grown: physically and mentally.
          • Employing children may be an apparent good as children are earning money while also being off the streets (in countries or villages where education is not highly available and money is needed to support families). However children are being exploited and used for cheap labour and therefore this is an apparent good.
            • Instead of using child labour, Nike could follow the primary precept: "educate your offspring" so instead of employing children for them to earn money (if they did think this was a good thing) they could use their large amount of profit to fund education in LEDC's.
        • Christian ethics would say that children are part of God's creation and therefore they have intrinsic value and need to be protected (perhaps even more so as they are "innocent"). They would not support child labour in any shape or form.
    • Nestle: baby formula
      • Kant
        • Humans should not be treated as a means to an ends. Nestle are acting as if unnecessary suffering is a by-product of success.
          • The categorical imperative would argue that exploitation should be able to be universalised. This is not the case as it would simply cause death and destruction of entire LEDC's. Therefore Nestle need to stop exploiting people for their own gain.
      • Natural law and Christian ethics
        • Natural Law would state that this is a direct violation of "good is to be done and evil is to be avoided" as this exploitation undoubtedly contributes to a higher infant mortality rate.
          • This also violates the primary precept "protect and preserve human life"
        • Christian ethics (dominion and stewardship) would argue that all humans have intrinsic value. This means that Nestle are exploiting people for their own gain and therefore are abusing God's greatest creation (dominion) and preventing more people from protecting all of God's creation (stewardship)
      • Utilitarianism
        • The short term benefits of Nestle exploiting vulnerable people would be profit. However these short term benefits do not remove the short term costs: loss of life. Over time, this loss of life will only increase.
          • Singer would argue that as humans are at the top of the hierarchy of sentience, they deserve the most moral consideration. Therefore Nestle should stop exploiting people for profit.
      • Virtue ethics
        • Not only does Nestle completely disregard the idea of community and of flourishing together, exploiting people not only diminishes the chances of them being able to cultivate their virtues, it also means that Nestle are not cultivating their own virtues e.g. temperance (a balance between profit and treating people with respect)
    • Edward Snowden: whistleblowing
      • Virtue ethics
      • Natural law and Christian ethics
      • Kant
        • The answer can be found a priori - if a company is behaving in an unjust way, we have a duty to report this regardless of loss of job etc. The right course of action is verified prior to experience.
      • Utilitarianism
    • Co-op: ethical supermarket
      • Virtue ethics
        • The idea of involving the community in the running of this supermarket is something virtue ethics would support as they often stress the importance of flourishing together a a community
      • Natural law and Christian ethics
        • Natural law: by encouraging group management of the business, this supports the primary precept "live in a society"
        • Christian ethics would support this idea as everyone has a say in who runs the business which increases community spirit. Co-op has also reduced greenhouse gases and stocks fair trade alternatives so those of the stewardship approach would say that co-op are helping to protect God's creation.
      • Utilitarianism
        • By weighing up costs and benefits of running co-op as a community, a conclusion may be that there is more happiness and pleasure for a larger number of people when they are included and listened to in their work place.
          • The long term benefits of running a business this way would be that customers would remain loyal to the supermarket, thereby allowing a larger profit over time.
      • Kant
        • Untitled
    • Erin Brokovich
      • Kant
        • If a company or business is doing something unethical it is our duty to report it regardless of the consequences
      • Virtue ethics
      • Natural law and Christian ethics
      • Utilitarianism

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Ethics resources »