While our organization prides itself in a well-defined and thorough code of ethics, there are occasions where situations arise, but the solution is not clearly defined within our code. In such a case, it is critical to develop a decision making framework that allows our employees to make a decision while operating within the moral guidelines of our corporation. In the hope that we can eliminate discrepancies, Royal Dutch Shell has created an ethical decision strategy that will make clear the ethical standings of our corporation and ensure a consistent decision making process. Our decision making process is focused on our stakeholders, and how we can maximize their benefit. Various decisions will have drastically different impacts on the different …show more content…
For example, we must look at the stakeholders that would be affected if Royal Dutch Shell were to expand its operations into the Arctic Ocean. Afterwards, the effects on the different stakeholders must be determined as either beneficial or harmful, if deemed harmful, the extent to which harm would be administered must be detailed, and if deemed beneficial, these benefits must be described in terms of all of the stakeholders involved. Ultimately, the core of every business decision lies in the cost and potential benefit derived from making the decision. We must determine a dollar value of our actions, which could come in the forms of new revenues, compared to the costs, which could form in the form of environmental cleanup or lawsuits. Furthermore, the value of our reputation and public relations must also be …show more content…
Royal Dutch Shell seeks to create the greatest good for the greatest number, which in our business, takes the form of making our product more readily available and less expensive for our customers. When this is the case, individuals will have more disposable income, our product can be purchased in higher volume, and people in the regions where will drill will reap the benefits of our business ventures. Similarly, when our analysis deems the environmental or public relations damages too large to sustain, the proposed course of action will be abandoned. For example, our proposed Arctic drilling was abandoned partly due the large public outcry that came from the proposed action. This viewpoint could also be defended through a Kantian viewpoint. Our intention through our business operations is not to exploit people. No, through our business, Royal Dutch Shell seeks to provide economic empowerment and cost effective fuels for the world to enjoy. Furthermore, this would not breech the categorical imperative. Our corporation would welcome our course of action becoming a universal, we are not treating people as a means, but rather as ends, and we seek this course of action because it is right to do
There are many stakeholders in this case and each stakeholder could be affected in various situations.
This paper is an analysis of the ethical business decision matrix developed by The George S. May Company (May), a management-consulting firm. The paper will also compare how these guidelines were used by John D. Beckett (Beckett) in his company and how the author’s firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC (PwC), uses them. The guidelines are meant to be used by employees. These guidelines are specifically a measure of moral and ethical principles tied to business ethics in acceptability of right and wrong behaviour in the workplace.
Ethical decision-making is the responsibility of everyone, regardless of position or level within an organization. Interestingly, the importance of stressing employee awareness, improving decisions, and coming to an ethical resolution are the greatest benefits to most companies in today’s world (Weber, 2015).
The method of ethical decision making which was developed by Dr. Cathryn A. Baird presented two components contained in all ethical decisions which are; The Four ethical Lenses and the 4+1 Decision process. The Four Ethical Lenses issue claims that different ethical theories and the means in which we tend to approach the situations which form part of our ethical traditions are looked at in four different perspectives. From each perspective there are different values on which to decide whether the action taken is either ethical or not and each lens also lays emphasis on determining whether the decision made is of ethical requirement. In the 4+1 Decision Process, people who are responsible for making final decisions in an organization do it using four specific decision making steps and eventually will end up with one extra decision which gives a chance to reflect. The 4+1 decision process allows the decision makers to give solutions when faced with complicated ethical issues (John Muir Institute for Environmental Studies, 2000).
Nathan Rosillo, a key product developer at Chem-Tech Corporation finds himself in the middle of an exceedingly complex ethical dilemma (Pg. 156). He is the moral agent (Pg. 156) of the company who needs to decide if he wants to protect his beloved Dutch Valley River from the waste materials that can be dumped into it after the loosened requirements of the regulatory agencies. The new lubricant product developed by Nathan and his team is seen by his company supervisor and plant manager as key to reviving the financial fortunes of a cash strapped Chem-Tech. The cost savings arising from less need to reduce and recycle the waste from the new product seem to resonate well with the management’s profit-maximizing view (Pg. 167), and also allow them to stay in compliance with the loosened environmental standards. Nathan has the following 3 choices:
Typically in the business cycle, companies have a tendency to become the most concerned with the sales sector of their industry. These companies look passed the environmental detriment of society for the chance at obtaining an additional dollar. “When money becomes a measure—as well as the means—of all things, the potential for economic and political mischief grows” (Chouin...
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2011). Business ethics: Ethical decision making and cases: 2011 custom edition (8th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
The political instability inherent in emerging economies make for very challenging business environments. In late October 1995, Royal Dutch Shell founds itself in just such a tenuous environment in Niger. As Paine and Moldoveanu (2009) outlined,Shell came under scrutiny in the 1990’s for the environmental impact that they were having on the Niger Delta. Shell was accused of creating an “ecological disaster” on the region, caused by oil spills, emissions from flaring of natural gas, and drainage of contaminated water into the waterways (Paine & Moldoveanu, 2009). Adding to the operating complexity, the Nigerian government and its leader faced escalating international condemnation for the actions of a special military tribunal
At the four year mark of the Deep Water Horizon accident in the Gulf of Mexico, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows British Petroleum (BP) to drill for oil in the gulf once again. Many consumer advocate groups, chiefly Public Citizens, have voiced concerns over this decision. The lack of corporate accountability and oversight makes this decision seem unethical to these advocates groups. However, the company agrees to follow the agency’s ethic and safety procedure given the new leases. Yet, a series of accidents on its infrastructure makes reform seem doubtful for the company.
Jared Diamond, in his essay “Will Big Business Save the Earth?”, argues that even though multi-billion dollar corporations generate massive amounts of waste, they are also capable of being forerunners in support of environmentalism. Without a doubt, Diamond makes it very clear to the reader that, originally, he was of the opinion that big corporations were incapable of minimizing their impact on the environment, due to their purely financial drive to accumulate revenue for their investors. But when he became a board member of environmentalist outfits like the World Wildlife Fund and Conservation International, he was given the task to assess the environmental impact of various companies across differing economic sectors. While there were indeed some that made a huge negative impact on the environment, in his research, Diamond noticed that were a sizeable number of companies that excelled greatly in being more cautious in how they affect the environment. Of these companies, he takes note of
Making good ethical decisions requires a trained sensitivity to ethical issues and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps.
Importantly, when thinking about the cost-benefit approach, it should be borne in mind that its proponents are not strictly motivated to act ethically, unless the cost of not doing so is sufficiently high, or if acting ethically will result in economic profit. For example, a industrial company may know that dumping chemical waste into a nearby river is harmful to the environment, and by extension, human and non-human animals, although still decide to dispose of their waste in such a manner, as it is economically cheaper to do so, than to dispose of the waste in a safe but more costly manner. In coming to such a decision, they may have also weighed the potential fines and loss of business if they are exposed, although determined that such costs are not sufficiently high compared to the economic savings of cheaper, inappropriate dumping, so will maintain the current method of disposal.
Many managers and organisations make the mistake of assuming that what’s wrong is illegal and what’s legal is right and if it’s legal it must be ethical. Yet many ethical dilemmas present themselves before the decision makers where right and wrong can not be clearly identified. They involve conflict between interactive parts – “the individual against the organisation or the societ...
When the problem became serious two main views formed: the “narrow” view and the “broader” view, based on different ideas. The “narrow” view is based on the proposition that corporations have no social responsibility and they have only one main purpose, to make a profit (Friedman, 1970). So corporations should remain socially independent and all conflicts must be solved through the individual responsibility concept. On the contrary the “broader” view states that corporations have social obligations as all existing participants of market, persons and entities are tied together and are mutually dependent. So corporations cannot ignore some serious events or problems, which take place, and must help society, as profit is not their single purpose.
It seems obvious that large corporations have a tendency to ignore the negative effects of their actions in favor of profit. This example, although sensationalized, still says to me that with power comes responsibility. It affirmed my belief that a corporation’s goal cannot be just to provide profit to shareholders, but there must also be an element of social responsibility.