Ethical theories
Management practice does involve the ability to have a decisive influence on initiations as well as the actions of the other people and events (Reynold 2008, pp.676-695). In the case where the promotion right of the manager in question was violated, it is always crucial to analyze some of the literature that deals with discrimination as well as other theories that are related to this concept. Business ethics are the rules, codes, standards, principles and rules that do provide moral guidelines on the right behavior (Steven et al 2005, pp 43-45). The business ethics can either be normative or descriptive in a corporate practice, normative ethics are generally applied (Deen, 2004). There is the employee motivation and practice that should have been adhered to in this case study (Robert, 2010). The main job of the manager in any work place is to generally get things done by the employees. In order for them to work effectively without any arguments and feelings of desperation, the employees should be motivated though that is always easier said than done. Human nature at times does tend to be complex though it is easy. One of the ways that the organizations can become more innovative is through capitalizing their employees without discriminating them.
There should have also been an inclusion of normative ethical theories which is basically an attempt to provide the general theory that does tell us how we are actually supposed to live. Normative ethics do attempt to answer some questions on morality. In any act there are some things that ought to be interesting morally. First is the agent, then there is the act itself and consequences of any act. The normative ethics does bridge the gap that does exist between the applied ethics and the Meta ethics. The bank in this case did not follow the practical standards that do clarify right from wrong on ways to live moral lives. It also did not articulate the essential and justifiable habits that ought to be acquired and duties that they should follow. The other that should have been followed is the virtue ethics that does distinguish approaches on normative ethics which does emphasize on virtues and moral character in contrast of what is emphasized as duties and rules as well as consequences of given actions (Rosalind, 1999). In this case there was an issue of discrimination where the chief of operations was discriminated against by the bank and denied promotion despite the fact that he was better than even some of his counterparts who got the promotion. The term discriminate does refer to the distinguishing of an object to another and not necessary due some wrong activities that have been committed (Minggu, 2009). Discrimination in employment does consist of three elements. One it usually a decision against a certain employee and is not based on some individual merit for example the aptitude to perform a certain job. Secondly, the decision is usually derived solely or may be in part from the sexual prejudice or racial issues or maybe some false stereotypes and other moral wrongs (Ratsamy Brian 1999).
Thirdly, the decision always does have some negative effects on interests of employees and can cause loss of job or controversy. Discrimination is the act or part of a routine action or behavior of any group which does discriminate some members out of personal prejudice (Ben Brian, 1999). In this scenario, it is not the first time that he was actually denied promotion but it was a routine. Executive derailment is always a critical issue in corporations and other business sectors. Managers always derail when they refuse to meet some role expectations (Raymond Brian 2001, pp.267-275). It is patent that this was a form of discrimination. There are many arguments that do purport as this to be violation. There is the Utilitarian argument that does allege that discrimination leads to the inefficient use of the human resource field. There is also the Rights argument that claims that discrimination does violate the basic human rights. The Justice arguments claim that the impact of discrimination does result in the unjust distribution of the benefits and burdens of the society.
The utilitarian argument on sexual and racial discrimination is based on the factor and idea that the societys production will always be optimized on extents that jobs are just awarded on grounds of competency. Discrimination on the job applicants and the employees on basis of religion, sex, race and others that are not related to job performance is inefficient and is contrary to principles of utilitarian (Charles, 1997). The nonutilitarian arguments against sexual and racial discrimination do take the approach that basically discrimination is totally wrong as it violates the moral rights. The Kantian theory for example does hold that the human beings ought to be treated always as free persons who are equal to others and all persons do have a moral duty to treat every individual fairly.
The second form of nonutilitarian arguments on discrimination view discrimination as the violation of justice principle. John Rawls does argue that among all principles that deal with justice there should be an element of equal opportunities in the workplace. Their should fair equality of prospects and discrimination does violate the principle as it closes off to all the minorities and refuting to give them an opportunity to compete in the work place like the rest thus bringing the issue unjust. The principle of equality does state that the persons who are always equal in all other respects should always be treated equally even if they are divergent in other respects. There should be implementation of equity programmes at all workplaces through the human resource (Glenda et al, 2004, pp. 196-204).
The theory of utility should also have been followed in this bank. The theory does state that everybody has got a moral obligation to go ahead and take the course of action that will actually have a great impact and no idea can be fully comprehend until it is actually incorporated in a systematic field of knowledge (Jon Johan 2008, pp. 250-257). The obligation of the bank on their employee did not have a great consequence because obviously it did affect the psychological aspect and did bring some controversy as they did not communicate effectively on their reason of such ill behavior. The theory of deontology does state that we are obliged morally to act as in the accordance with some set rules and principles regardless of the outcome. Despite the personal differences that may have been there between the two concepts, the reality is there should have been a clear communication between the two parties and they explain why they are not promoting him.
The fairness theory presumes that the matter of social justice is actually the assignment of blame (Jerald et al). When people do identify aspect of unfairness they are always seen to holding somebody accountable for the actions that do threaten their psychological well being. Fairness does influence employee behaviors and attitudes in an organization (Herman et al, 2005, pp 143-171). In this case the fairness theory was not used as it should be in the bank as it led to unfair treatment of the employee on the grounds of denial of promotion. The most prominent driving force in any business is its long term profitability and the support of the companys leadership, competitiveness, anticipation of the future as well as efficiency (Elisa 2004, pp 20-31). Various theories and principles have been used to describe the practices that are held in the work place. It is the moral duty of any organization to see unto it that ethics is curtailed in their area of work.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment