Decision making in an ethical sense

Any organizational structure must take ethics into consideration. It has an impact on how decisions are made at the organizational level and further affects the methods that a particular organization will use to increase its performance. The ethical conundrums that arise in the organization, however, are caused by the variations in ethical standards among individuals. Analyzing an ethical quandary necessitates evaluating the circumstances, choosing the best course of action, contrasting the outcomes of those choices, and finding a way to resolve the quandary.

Issue of Ethics

The George Cosgrove case is an illustration of the moral conundrum that most personnel inside the organizational hierarchy contend with. Essentially, George Cosgrove is forced to determine on whether to act in accordance with his own principles as an individual or align themselves to the ethical principles that are embodied by his superior for personal gains. Essentially, Perry Periwinkle hopes to use the five-years extension of the intellectual property rights granted by the State to increase the price of the “Shot-o-Vac”.

However, since George is one of the last officials to approve a product before it is released to the market, the CEO sought the SVP’s counsel on the issue. On his part, George is concerned that the price increase constitutes an act of dishonesty since during discussions with government officials, the CEO determined that there would be no price increases in the future. Furthermore, George felt the device price was set correctly and that it allowed the company to earn a good profit margin.

The Decision

George should approve and support the CEO’s course. If George decides to approve the revised prices, he would be negating his internal pledge to always be an instrument of good but emphasizing his pledge to the company. In making the decision he would be engaging the deontological ethical framework (Robinson, 2007). George would not only augment his relationship with the CEO, but further enable All-in-One Pharmaceutical, Inc. to secure more profit from its productive processes if he approves the price. The initiative may further positively affect George’s pay package. The deontological ethical principle necessitates the need for George to engage in actions that reinforce their obligations to the company (Fischer, 2000).

Likewise, George’s actions can be validated through the employ of the principle of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism stresses on the need for one to engage in actions that promote the greater good (Fischer, 2000). Essentially, the principle acknowledge that a decision cannot address the concerns of every individual in the decision but should at least address the concerns of the majority in the subject group. In approving the price increase, not only will George be able to benefit from the initiative in terms of increased pay packages, he would also be able to retain his reputation and the ultimate happiness of the employees due to improved profits. Furthermore, the action would still be beneficial to the clients since they will still be able to acquire the device albeit at an increased price.

Comparison and Contrast of Deontological and Utilitarianism Principles

SIMILARITIES

DIFFERENCES

Both are not concerned with the morality of the actor. Deontology and utilitarianism arguments do not look at the rightness or wrongness of an action

Utilitarianism is concerned with the outcomes of the action while Deontology is concerned with the obligations of the actor (Moreland, 2009).

Both acknowledge the concept of inevitability in ethical decision making. Essentially, circumstances and environment influences the decisions made by an individual (Robinson, 2007).

Utilitarianism ratifies inevitability as long as it is beneficial to the majority while Deontology ratifies inevitability only if the actor is obligated to act in a particular manner.

Best Result

The deontological framework provides the best ethical concept to be engaged in ratifying George’s support of the CEO’s policies. George is obligated to the company given his senior position (Moreland, 2009). He should therefore ensure that he engages in in actions that promote the interests of the company above his own interests. The duty of George in the company is to ensure that it grows both financially and structurally. The new prices will allow the company to secure more profit from the sale of the devices. Likewise, upholding the law comprises one of the duties of George in his senior position. Nonetheless, the policy engaged by the CEO is not a breach of any legal framework. The clients will still be able to access the devices in the market, the company will be able to draw more profit, George will be the subject of increased pay package and his reputation within the organization will be retained should he choose to accede to the price increase.

Conclusion

George’s case is an example of many ethical dilemmas that face employees on a daily basis. In deciding on the actions to engage, an individual ought to determine their obligations within the organization. One should act in a duty-bound manner to ensure no conflicts of interest arise in the execution of organizational duties. The deontological principle reinforces the need for one to engage in actions that are necessitated by their circumstances rather than their own inclinations.

References

Fischer, M. (2000 ). Ethical Decision Making in Fund Raising . NJ : Wiley

Moreland, J. P. (2009, April 17). Ethics Theories: Utilitarianism Vs. Deontological Ethics. Retrieved from CRI: http://www.equip.org/article/ethics-theories-utilitarianism-vs-deontological-ethics/

Robinson, D. A. (2007). Managing Ethical Dilemmas in Non-Profit Organizations. Bond Business School , 1-15.