Ethics

The Citigroup, Inc. took over Associates First capital Corporation, the largest publicly traded finance company with assets over 100 billion and shareholders equity of 10.4 billion. The amalgamation of two corporate giants into the CitiFinancial unit led to growth in business and eventually profits. The driving force behind this increased profit was subprime lending. It refers to giving loan to people who do not meet the credit requirements of the banks. Though it is resulting in huge profits for the company, there are various ethical concerns associated with this practice. Many people think that the penalties are very strict and the interest rates are very high as compared to the risk the company is taking by giving out loans to risky customers.  It is important to analyze the arguments based on various ethical theories and then conclude whether the practice of the company is morally right or wrong.

Utilitarianism
An ethical concept based on the satisfaction of people is utilitarianism. According to this principle, an action is morally correct if the outcome (or its utility) is beneficial for maximum number of people and not for the decision makers only. For example, if a car model is defective, the company knows its defect so morally, and keeping utilitarianism in mind, the company should roll back its operations. Although, it will cost a lot to the company but the lives of its potential user will be saved.

If we consider the practices of subprime lending, it targets the low-income segment of population, which does not meet the credit requirements of normal banks. Although it is good practice because it makes loan available to people who cannot afford it otherwise, there are numerous negative aspects of this practice, which are as follows

Pre-payment Penalties
The charges in terms of pre-payment penalties are very high and it forces the people to pay interest. This is one of the ways, which the banks use to make extra profit however, it is extremely costly for the borrower who has sufficient to pay back the entire loan. If we analyze the overall impact of this penalty on the society, we can say that the consequences can be devastating for the society because people who can use money to buy something else, are forced to pay as loan interest even if the have sufficient money to pay the principal amount back.

Marketing Approach of the Company
There has been tremendous growth in subprime lending, thanks to its aggressive marketing approach. The lenders usually rely on mass advertising and direct marketing to attract customers. Since subprime lending usually targets lower income groups, minorities, and elderly people, Critics argue that they are usually less educated and thus they fail to understand the terms and conditions of the loan. This means that the lenders are gaining at the cost of the ignorant borrowers. Again, it is against the concept of utilitarianism and many people are at a loss.

Rights
In simple terms, rights refer to a persons entitlement to something. For example, a right derived from the legal system is referred to as a legal right. If we consider the practices of the company with reference to the rights theory, we can conclude that it is an individuals right to get loan for any thing he wants to buy. Since most banks are not giving this right to people (because of their inability to meet the credit requirements), they are forced to take loan from sub prime lenders. Secondly, every individual has the right to get his desired product. For example, the sub prime lenders are forcing its customers to buy single-premium life insurance, which is very expensive for them. Usually the borrowers are from low-income group, they cannot afford to pay for the insurance. This takes away the right to loans from them.

Since there are limited restrictions on the sub prime lenders, they are taking undue advantage of the customers and are making profit out of it. High interest rates and the condition to buy an insurance policy adds on to the cost of the borrower and discourages him from borrowing. Simply put, these high charges are taking away a right of individual to life, as money is the most important thing a person needs to live.

Justice
These practices of the company cannot be justified on moral grounds because of its exploitative nature. It cannot be justified that a person who is willing and able to pay back the principal amount is forced not to pay. Similarly charging and financing excessive fee cannot be justified either. It is extremely unethical and immoral to misrepresent the terms and conditions of loans. The lenders should keep this thing in mind that a contract does not exist if the terms and conditions of the contract are misrepresented. Targeting vulnerable borrowers, including elderly, minorities, and low-income group and later harassing them is not just morally wrong but should be considered a crime and should not be justified on any cost.

Recommendations
The fact that CitiFinancial is giving loans to people who are rejected by other banks should be appreciated however, this does not give the right to the company to exploit the poor and the vulnerable. The company can take up some measures to respond to the criticism it is currently facing. For example, the company can end up its pre-payment penalty. This will not affect their net profits because when people will pay back the principal amount, the company will have sufficient funds to give out more loans. Since this process will increase the lending ability of the company, it will cover up for the revenue, which was lost because of early payments. Another measure, which the company can take, is that it should stop selling single premium life insurance. Since the company is charging high interest on loans, it should not impose additional cost on the borrowers. One of the criticisms on the company is that they are charging higher interest rate as compared to the risk associated with a particular customer. This means that the companies are already covering up for their potential losses in case of death of the customer, thus they have no right to charge any additional fee from the customers.

Conclusion
Citigroup should ensure that the sales representatives follow and abide by these recommendations and should not only focus upon sales volume. The company can conduct workshops and training sessions to train the employees about its new policies. Secondly, the employees should be given some moral education on regular intervals to instill the humanitarian beliefs and values in them. This will not only help in current situation but in future, if the Citigroup ever encounter such criticism, they can prove that their employees cannot do immoral actions because of their philanthropic training at the organization.

The Greeks were known to have created and practiced the principles embedded in the Hippocratic Oath ever since it was instituted. The contents of this ancient text were still being utilized and highly respected by medical practitioners, most specifically by physicians.  According to the US Department of Labor, Physicians examine patients, obtain medical histories, and order, perform and interpret diagnostic tests (2009). Furthermore, the physicians are also responsible in giving advice to patients regarding health care. The Hippocratic Oath governs the ethical responsibilities of physicians. More particularly, physicians sworn that they must not do harm. Blackman and Bailey (1990) showed that the Oath mentioned that physicians swear the following

I will followtreatment, which, according to my ability and judgment and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest and such counsel furthermore, I will not give a woman an instrument to produce abortion.

Centuries have passed and this ethical code still applies to physicians until this age. However, current circumstances proved to challenge the applicability of this doctrine. Specifically, when the Fourteenth Amendment had made it very clear that the laws must not violate the persons life, liberty and property without the due process of the law (Mount, 2010). This simple declaration illuminates the right of the person to decide for himself, to make his own choices about life and to protectdefend his property including his body. To this end, medical issues regarding physician assisted harm were being reflected on a new light.

This paper would limit its discussion to physician-assisted suicide. A definition of the term would initially be laid out. The discussion of the morality and legality of the physician assisted suicide would follow. The ability of the sick person to decide would be discussed in relation to its legal and moral basis. Lastly, there will be an evaluation of whether or not the PAS is a viable right.

Definition
The term physician assisted suicide already undermines the denotative meaning of the concept. It is killing oneself through the helpcounsel of a physician. To discuss this manner elaborately, each of the concepts could be studied apart from each other. The term physician was already mentioned above. Taking the meaning of the term into context, physicians act as enabler or someone who does not prevent the act from happening (Weir, 1997). The term assistance implies the need for help or inability to do something alone. In a PAS, the enabler could provide information and materials that are necessary to conduct suicide. Suicide is a condition when the actorperson would like to kill oneself. In medical conditions, the patient might request the physician for advice and assistance to conduct suicide (Weir, 1997). Physician assisted suicide is made when the physician agreed to the help the patient die. It is different from voluntary euthanasia, wherein someone ends the life of another person at their request (Park, 2006). It is also different from removing the dying persons life support. In such extreme scenarios, the physicians decide on their own or upon consultation with the immediate family.

Is assisted suicide right or wrong morally
The current society is composed of several cultures converging and affecting the personal beliefs of individuals. Since morality is a part of the human culture, it is inevitable for people to become exposed to a wide variety of ethical principles. During the formulation of the Hippocratic Oath, the most famous ethical principle was virtue ethics, which stressed the importance of character or virtue. A person is virtuous if he possesses virtues like courage and hope. A person who is about to commit, committing or committed suicide do not possess these traits.

Another way to determine the rightness or wrongness of an action is through deontological ethics, which emphasized that human action, must rely on duties and obligations. Humans must be treated as ends in themselves and not merely as means to achieve an end. Under this ethical framework, an action is right if it is applicable to every human being about to perform andor receive the action. In the case of suicide, the enabler might be feeling guilty because of the act. The enabler may not wish that the same thing would also happen to himself. In this case, the action of the enabler is deontologically wrong.

Lastly, there is also an ethical principle known as consequentialism. This is concerned with the consequences of human actions and not with the actions themselves. For example, the act of lying under the deontological and virtue ethics is considered as morally wrong. However, using the concepts in consequentialism, lying is not wrong if it is meant to protect someone. In assisting suicide, the assistants action would cause the death of another human being. This is in itself harmful and destructive. Since the consequences of the action are negative, then assisted suicide under this moral framework is wrong.

The morality of the action could also depend on the culture, for example, in Japanese culture suicide is regarded as a highly virtuous act. Assisted suicide is also highlighted through the act of Seppuku under the Samurai code, wherein an assistant would make sure that the samurai died through decapitation. In Christian countries, on the other hand, suicide is a taboo. People who had committed suicide were not given blessings of the church.

Under the letter of the law is it legal in the U.S. and if not why not
In 1997, Hilary Evans highlighted the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States had unanimously agreed that, physician assisted suicide is not a constitutional right. On the surface, it seems as if the Supreme Court was against PAS. Nevertheless, a closer look into the decision reveals that the Supreme Court did not prohibit the practice. They simply passed the burden of judgment to State Courts. This is the reason behind the permission of conducting PAS in Oregon under very tightly controlled conditions (Robinson, 2007). In North Carolina, Wyoming and Utah, PAS was not even mentioned in the laws. The rest of the states in the US are antagonistic about it.  An article from Wisse-To.com mentioned that in Oregon, PAS could be conducted if the physician had already exhausted all efforts that could be applied, and then the patient has the right to take his or her own life. In California, it was stated in the California Penal Code, Every person who deliberately aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of felony (Internationaltaskforce.org). The different legal position of the PAS in different States portrays the dissimilarities in culture, mores and belief systems across the States.

Can a person that is ill, capable of deciding his or her own fate
Although people have the right over their own liberty, life and body, a valid decision could only be attained if it is achieved through rational means. This is the underlying concept on cases that are closed due to insanity plea. More often than not, people develop suicidal thoughts when they are depressed, or if they are suffering from extreme pain. The pain could be physical or psychological. Nonetheless, it does affect the ability of the person to decide rationally. In relation to this, Barbara A. Olevitch (2002). mentioned that

Not only is the mental health goal of independence inapplicable for the sick and elderly, also, the assumed method of therapy is impractical. Should a sick or dying person decide that in spite of the difficulty of achieving greater mental health at her stage of life, she, nevertheless, wants to try, the kind of therapy our culture imaginesmany sessions with an understanding therapist with the opportunity to grow over a long period of timewould not be feasible.

Considering the fact that most of the persons that would choose to conduct suicide are people who are already hopeless, their ability to decide would be largely impaired by their emotions. Nonetheless, the case of Robert Baxter, from Montana in 2009 had shown that there are cases when people with healthy mind decided to die due to excruciating pain and agony (Johnson, 2009). Their decision might indeed be affected by pain and emotions, but those that supported Baxter argued that people should have the right to die well.

Is it a right to choose whether or not you want to die and if so under what established guidelines
Medical practitioners are required by virtue of their oath and by medical authorities not to do harm to their patients. However, they are required by the same oath and authorities to respect the patients autonomy. Autonomy refers to the ability of the person to make informed consent and deciding on his own after rational deliberation. In the surface, it is not right for a person to choose whether to die. Life is too precious to lose. Different ethical principle would reveal that choosing death is not a moral thing or a rational thing to do. However, certain circumstances might push a person to decide that death is better than life. Although these circumstances are rare, they do exist. Thus, given strict guidelines a person could rightfully choose to die. The guideline must consider the probability of living a healthy life. For instance, terminally ill patients have a right to decide to die because they might suffer more if they continue to live. It is important to note that physicians also have the responsibility to minimize the amount of pain and the sufferings experienced by the patients as much as possible. Therefore, considering that, the decision could minimize the harm experienced by the patient and the choice was voluntarily made due to extreme sufferings that could not be prevented by any type of available medication, PAS is a rational persons choice.

Conclusion
A physician-assisted suicide entails that the patient decided to kill himherself through the influence of hisher physician. The moral basis of PAS would remain relative and subjective because ethical considerations are highly dependent on culture. Moreover, medical innovations, which are continuously changing also, have an impact on the life-expectations and living conditions of the patients. The patients, who considered conducting PAS today, might not have the same decision if he had the same circumstances 5-10 years henceforth. The laws regarding PAS could also change in the near future. The legality could become more definite or vaguer depending on the prevalence of PAS in the country. The legality would largely be determined by the persons ability to decide rationally.
Therefore, a person who is not terminally ill, not an elderly, andor has the perfect capacity to undergo other available treatments should not be permitted to conduct PAS. People have the right to protect hisher life. People also have the right to protect hisher liberty and property. Living is a right, dying is a choice.

In a highly competitive environment, do business ethics still exist If you are working for a multinational company, or have your own business, facing daily ethical decisions is normal.  As mentioned in the article Business Ethics- It Takes the Lead in Enforcing Ethics written by Stephanie Stahl, we come to a point where we need to decide whether or not to be honest to our customers, clients, competitors, and even with co-workers. At the end of the day, these are all about ethics.

All businesses have their own policies and guiding principles. These may or may not be written.  Sometimes these are followed.  Most of the time, these are just ignored.  What does it take to practice business ethics  It boils down to personal values and standards. It is the responsibility of an organization to promote business ethics among its employees. These are fundamental values and beliefs of a company, which should be properly cascaded and practiced.  It is important for employees to fully understand the code of business principles of the company they are working for.  This way, it will be easier for them to perform their daily tasks.  When faced with a difficult situation, having business ethics will make the decision making process simpler.

How Business Can Be Good
Business ethics is not just for the employees and stakeholders welfare, but for the success of an organization as a whole.  Jeffrey Seglin, writer of How Business Can Be Good, cited Johnson and Johnson as an example.  The company recalled 31 million bottles of Tylenol from stores after eight consumers died from cyanide-laced capsules. This incident cost them 240 million, and cut their profits of 5 billion into half. The tampering of the product was not their fault, but Johnson  Johnson acted on this problem fast, even before completing the investigation and information needed to prove the cause of the Tylenol case.  After much study, a new design was launched and Tylenol got back in the market.  What do we learn from this case  The quick response of Johnson  Johnson saved Tylenol brand and the lives of many of its consumers. This proactive act was appreciated by the market and put the company into a good light in the eyes of the consumers. What Johnson  Johnson did showed that they are aware of their corporate social responsibility.  They faced a big ethical decision and made the right move.  They put their consumers first before their profits.  In the end, this resulted into significant goodwill from customers.

We face ethical decisions in our daily lives.  Most often than not, these are not easy decisions to make.  It takes a lot of maturity, strong values and sense of responsibility to act morally.  Today in the modern business world, a strong foundation of values and ethical model should be in place.  When faced with a moral or ethical issue, putting priority into the people who will be greatly affected should come first.  Ensure that the decision will be beneficial to the society or to the majority, and not to your political relationship or status.  The Four Way Test of the Rotary Club is a good ethical model to follow.  Of the things we think, say or do, ask the following questions 1. Is it the Truth 2. Is it Fair to all concerned 3. Will it build Goodwill and better Friendships 4. Will it be Beneficial to all concerned  By having these questions as guide before deciding on a simple issue, or ethical problem, making a good decision is within reach.

McClains commentary on the case seems to be the most logical. It is the most logical in the sense that it recognizes obesity as a national problem which can be resolved by either product development or information dissemination. McClain argued that it is the role of the sweet companies to make their products safe to consumers, in exchange for potential revenues. This social contract defines the producer-consumer relationship. Unnevehrs commentary is similar to that of McClains but the latter seemed to ignore the responsibility of southland in product development. The same case can be said about Murtaughs commentary. The commentary seemed to be indifferent to the general health problem  a stray commentary. The last commentary is the most disagreeable one. Lawsuits are not defined by who filed them but the moral and in this case, health content of perceived violation.

Applying utilitarianism, Southland should not reinvent its product line. It should concentrate on increasing its market share, driving profit levels to the maximum, and utilizing cheap ingredients to reduce costs. The overall aim is profitability. Should deontology is applied the company can ignore the potential threats of lawsuits. Note that since the establishment of the company, it followed rules to the letter. Indeed, if Southland obeyed food and drug regulations, combating lawsuits is an easy job. A plausible prediction is a lawsuit is filed the lawsuit is readily dismissed for lack of merit (since the company did not violate any rule) a congressional hearing is called there is a possible enactment of new regulations. If virtue ethics is applied, the company should reinvent its product lines, remove defected products in the market, and inform the public of their products potential health hazards. Among the three perspectives, only the third indicates the right thing to do.

Peter should advise the CEO to recast its product lines when public opinion is moving against sweet companies. Recasting the product line at an earlier date may prove costly for the company (especially if public opinion against the company turns out to be weak). Recasting the product lines at a later date can be perceived by the public as a measured rational response on the part of the company. Hence, the company is able to save time ad resources.

What defines the eternal law and natural law As human beings, there are legal laws prescribed through policies implemented by the government that are to be understood and taken into consideration in everyday living. Apart from the legal laws, there are also the concepts of eternal law and natural law that need to be understood. Through the questions posted in Question 91 and 94, Aquinas is able to provide a body of knowledge regarding eternal law and natural law. In order to understand the two bodies of law, questions from the  Summa Theologica  are posted together with the arguments that served as answers to the inquiries posted. The objections and the replies of Aquinas are both included to show a better understanding of the issues and the responses that are made in relation to the questions. After discussing the objections and the replies, it can be said that natural law and eternal law both exists among the human beings and the former is understood to be a single entity, prescribes acts of virtue, and is the same for all men. Likewise, both external and natural law governs the acts of human beings and does not distinguish among behavior or intention.

An understanding of natural law and eternal law allows a person to gain a considerable amount of knowledge pertaining to the non-human laws that surround the behavior and intentions of people. From a personal point of view, these laws are in existent and serve as the explicit dictators of human beings as they interact with one another and as members of the whole. In addition to this, these are the sources of shared norms, values, rules, and regulations that are followed within the society. The knowledge of these laws allow an individual to understand the larger form of control that dictates the human beings as they interact with people in the same sphere and shared society.

In Question 91, it is argued that no law can be considered as eternal based on the absence of someone from eternity whom the law can be imposed upon, the absence of someone from eternity who can be the source of promulgation, and the inapplicability of the end to be considered as eternal. Aquinas answers this and argues that there is indeed an eternal law by further disproving the objections stipulated. First, he mentions that those things are considered to be in existence with God so long as they are preordained by him and the Divine law have the same character as eternal law as long as it is ordained by God. Second, there are written and oral manifestos that exists and characterizes the promulgation of the eternal law. Third, the law actively implies that there is an order related to the end except in cases where it is a coincidental or extrinsic end.

In the next question, the objections argue that there is no natural law among human beings based on the idea that nature does not fit the characteristic of  super fluities  and does not fail in necessaries, action of men based on reason and will, and non-subordination of men to natural law because animals are not. However, Aquinas shows that natural law stems from the participation in eternal law, the act of reason and the will among men is based on nature, and that the irrational creatures are not considered to be a participant of eternal law and that rational creatures remain as part of the eternal law as they engage in an intellectual and rational thinking.

In the next question, objections show that natural law contains several precepts instead of only one. Based on the objections, there are several precepts that lead to the existence of multiple natural laws, there are several parts of human nature that correspond to many natural laws, and that there is only one precept of natural law that is the one that pertains to reason. However, Aquinas argues that there is only one natural law as it flows from one first precept, the parts of the human body with the condition of being ruled by reason are considered to belong to one precept, and all things that remain under the ruling of reason belongs to the law of reason.

In the next question, the objections are not all acts of virtue fall under subjects of natural law, sins are against a virtuous act and it follows that it is against nature, and the characteristics of being virtuous can vary from one person to another. However, Aquinas notes that there are things that are ordained to the natural common good that is similar to being ordained under the moral common good, those sins are against reason and nature and that there are certain special sins that are against nature, and that acts are to be considered in themselves and variations are attributed to the differences among men.

In the last question, the objections are in opposition to the idea that natural law is similar for all men. The objections are based on the idea that natural law is embedded into the Law and the Gospel but all are not in observance of the gospel, there is the presence of change that can alter the things that are just, and that natural law belongs to all that men are inclined to. However, Aquinas mentions that natural law is contained in the Law and the Gospel and that everyone is commanded to comply as he would be treated, the characteristic of just are conclusions that can fail in a few, and that their inclinations are controlled based on reason.

These questions and objections are the sources for the proof that there are eternal and natural laws that dictate human beings. Though it is not ingrained or does not have a formal agency for implementation, it is interesting to learn that there is a particular body of law that can be shared without the formality. In everyday living, the knowledge of these laws and the sources can help as people interact with one another. The understanding of its sources can be used in dictating the people about how they should go about in their everyday lives and in learning about the sources of these rules.

In the end, the arguments presented by Aquinas can be considered as sources for the understanding of natural and eternal law. It is established that these laws are present within the society and dictates how people interact. Though there are others who object to the existence of natural and external law, these arguments are clearly opposed through the propositions of Aquinas. These questions show that both eternal law and natural law exists among human beings. In addition to this, it is also known that natural law exists among human beings, acts of virtue fall under natural law, and that it is similar for all men. Both laws can be used as a determinant for the way people live and act within one another.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ETHICS TAKE-HOME EXERCISE 1

In any event that takes place, there are a number of reasons that can cause a conflict over whether a certain act was ethical or not. Hence, it is most desirable to have a proper fixed system to determine this and verify such an incident.

FACTS
Police officer stole money from a suspect that he arrested and expected his colleague to ignore this activity.

II. DETAILS
Murphy is a police officer who has been serving for 3 years. In the absence of his regular partner, he is paired with Candy for patrol duty. During their shift, they respond to a silent alarm in a local store. While Murphy calls for backup, Candy arrests the criminals and extortionate 1500 out of one of them and keeps it for his personal use. He then asks Eddie to remain quiet about this dealing and Eddie does.

III. ISSUE
After having witnessed the entire incident, is Eddie Murphy obliged to take any action against Candy for his conduct or not

IV. IDEALS
A few of the ideals in this assignment are
Justice
Justice is a highly relevant aspect in this context as it portrays the difference between the right and the wrong. It sheds light on the fact that it was unjust to the robber to have money (not yet proven as not his), taken from him and not returned. Also, the fact that the veteran got to enjoy the 1500, is unjust.

Fairness
It isnt fair to rob a man out of money that has not yet been proven as not belonging to him. And this is exactly what Andy did. Furthermore, he did not even turn it in and instead kept the money for his personal use.

Dishonesty
Dishonesty can be witnessed on the part of Candy who stole money and also on the part of Eddie Murphy who failed to report it despite having being a witness to the incident.

Deceit Candy deceived his superiors into believing that he was acting in the best interest of the country while he was actually deceiving them and earning for his personal satisfaction. Similarly, Eddie Murphy also deceives his superiors into believing that he would act ethically at all times when in fact in this incident he doesnt.

V. OBLIGATIONS

When viewing the obligations imposed in this case, there are two obligations that precede any other that could come up. First, is Candys obligation and second is Eddie Murphys

As per the Utilitarian Principle whatever decision leads to the greater good of the masses should be employed. Hence, Candy is obligated to not steal money from the convicts as this would result in him gaining money, while the convict loses money and the law enforcement system to breed corruption. Candy is also obligated to the authorities that granted him his position and placed trust in him to be fair and just. He owes it to them to personify every quality that is expected out of a man of such a rank and at his post.

Similarly, as per Utilitarianism Eddie is obligated to his state to ensure that wrong acts are punished accordingly as acts such as Candys only benefit Candy, while it is detrimental to the person whose money he stole and also to the state that placed trust in him to enforce law.

Another obligation is the obligation that lies with the convict whose money is stolen. It is also his obligation to report the theft and ensure that action is taken so that corruption within such organizations is also minimized.

VI. CONSEQUENCES
Candy He stole money from a suspect and kept it as his own. This could have led Candy being able to afford a college education for his daughter, or on the other hand, it could have led him to being punished by the authorities had he been reported and proven guilty.

Eddie Murphy He failed to report to authorities about Candys theft that he had witnessed. This makes Eddie and accomplice to the crime by not taking adequate action against the incident or informing the authorities about it. Hence, he could either get into trouble with his superiors if word would have gotten around, or else remained indifferent about it.

VII. CONCLUSION
Having taken into account all the events that took place, and after analyzing them with respect to Kants theories, we can easily conclude that Candys actions were completely unethical. He had no right to assume that the money in the suspects pocket was stolen, and furthermore, keep the money for his own personal use. It is also unethical on the part of Eddie Murphy who failing to take any actions against the crime he had witnessed, also became an accomplice to it.

1. Rushmore Kidder describes three basic moral models of thinking in simple phrases that summarize some of the more complex philosophical models of ethics. What are Kidders three basic moral models of thinking Describe each.Ans Rushmore Kidder in his book describes the following three basic models of thinking.

Watching other bystanders
It is human tendency to gather around a mob when there is something wrong going on. It is also human tendency to follow the mob. Kidder says that the more the crowd the longer it takes for somebody to speak against the wrong being committed. Thus in any organization if there is something wrong that has taken place that is aware to everybody, nobody interferes to offer a suggestion, rather they feel that it is normal for everybody to keep silent about it.

The ambiguity of irresponsible actions
In case there is any ambiguity involved in the wrong situation where either the person involved is not known or the case is unclear, people generally tend to ignore the issue and carry on as if nothing has gone wrong. This is the most common tendency when in an organization all the employees or a few of them know about the issue but ignore it and make it a way of work unless it is strictly investigated.

Diffused responsibility
It is human tendency that it is assumed that in case of any fault with the organization, it is not right to find fault with one particular individual. People do not hesitate to think that the person behind the mistake is not the only one who is punished. It is assumed that since the organization is huge, the real cause is hidden and everybody shares the responsibility of the problem.

2. Kidder also writes about four dilemma paradigms that are helpful in analyzing an ethical dilemma. Fully describe each of the four paradigms and how they are used in making ethical decisions.
Ans The four dilemma paradigms that are spoken of by Kidder are

Employment commitment and turnover
For every individual, conscience is the mirror where he says the reflection of his actions. Knowing that he has committed a mistake or helped in the issue, his conscience will never accept his guilt. Hence he will not be able to live peacefully and this results in poor performance of work and personal life. Hence such kind of behavior indicates malpractice and a decision to support what is right and wrong.

Corporate Norms
In case a person commits a mistake and is willing to hide and control the situation in hand, people generally follow his path and continue discharging their duties like a norm. Such behavior will only spoil any chances that the organization has in the competition and also ruin their work force. This can be a great influence on the organization and work force and necessary steps need to be taken to correct this kind of behavior and keep it further in check.

Organizational Values
Every working employee needs to follow certain rules and regulations framed by the organization in which they work in. Hence it is very important that the company frames rules that help avoid any malpractices in the company. Regulations should be formed more to improve working environments and not to force the employees to work under check. Healthy restrictions never cause harm and in reality help the organization in the long run.

Individual concerns
A few companies follow the principle of letting every employee speak their mind regularly, in meetings and other important events. This ensures that people voice their opinion from time to time. This is a good practice because not everybody can think alike and also not everybody is alert every minute. In this case, new ideas can be incorporated and several mistakes can be recognized early before they can cause much damage to the organization.

3. Give examples of each of kidders four dilemmas from your personal experience
Ans From my personal experience I have the following examples to share

a. When I resorted to cheating during exams when I was a kid in school, I was fortunately not caught by my supervisor. However my conscience really bothered me for a long time and hence I have never repeated that mistake. I remember passing many sleepless nights for my mistake. I have never encouraged this again.

b. My father who works in a bank has told us many times about people just following the norm every time a mistake is committed in their bank. If a teller has committed a mistake in not checking the signature on a check properly, he ignores the issue rather than reporting it, unless the customer comes back to complain. This has raised a lot of questions on the authenticity of the bank.

c. My college is very famous for its strict rules that smoking is not allowed in the premises. Our principal is the one who passes such regulations. He is aware that apart from being an unhealthy habit, it creates a very unprofessional atmosphere in the campus. Of late this has really proved to its merit when a visiting professor praised our college sky high.

d. In college, there was one particular teacher for English who encouraged students to speak their mind every week, which she called the opinion class. This helped a lot of us overcome stage fears and especially helped me when I complained about the assignment process that ruined our weekends almost always. This was immediately changed and a more student friendly process was introduced.

1. Mintzberg, et al, say that our society and corporations have been taken over by a syndrome of selfness. Explain what they mean.Ans  The syndrome of selfishness that is emphasized in the article is the malady of greed that has been incorporated everywhere today. All the companies have turned mean and greed has taken over the purpose of service and money and profits have taken over the need to be genuine.

2. What are the fabrications that they suggest support this syndrome or selfishness
Ans The essence that we are never satisfied and always yearn for more, organizations believe more in share holder value and profit maximization rather than service, all big companies need big brains and powerful men to control it and effective organizations are the fabrications that support this syndrome of selfishness.

3. What are your thoughts about Marjorie Kellys views that shareholders have privileges of feudal aristocrats
Ans Marjorie Kelly is right in comparing share holders to feudal aristocrats, since everybody who works for a particular product is hidden from the big picture and share holders whose sole purpose is to maximize the organizations share value are highlighted and given undue importance.

4. What is the effect of shareholder value on the other stakeholders
 Ans The share holders value is in reality the price of a stock and hence the more the value the more stake holders receive rewards.

5. Describe the authors view of engagement
Ans According to the author, every employee needs to be properly engaged in the proper activity where his production level is maximum.

1. What is corporate irresponsibility
Ans Corporate irresponsibility is when employees shun away from their duties or refuse to take responsibility for any mistakes committed or ignore the mistakes committed by others for the intent of saving somebody or other personal issues.

2. What is the difference between actively doing something unethical yourself, and observing someone else behaving unethically and doing nothing about it yourself
Ans Active participation in something unethical is considered wrong by everybody sine the person involved in the malpractice can be proved to be a part of it. However observing somebody doing something unethical and not doing anything about it cannot be proven and even though it has indirect influence it is not considered a big crime.

3. What is required of the individual managers to prevent corporate irresponsibility
Ans The role of managers to curb corporate irresponsibility is to check their sub ordinates from time to time and guide them for a proper growth. Also they need to make rules that help the work environment improve and better the performance of the company.

4. Bansal and Kandola suggest in their article that individuals are often guided in their behavior in social circumstances and in business organizations by watching other bystanders. What are the three ways they suggest that the bystander effect can explain how individual actions contribute to corporate social irresponsibility

Ans By observing by standers individuals feel that it is a normal measure to ignore mistakes. There is also a possibility that they feel that it is fine to make such mistakes and get away with it because people just tend to ignore it. Lastly since they think the responsibility is diffused they will never be blamed for the mistake.