Royal Dutch Shell Case Analysis

716 Words2 Pages

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

Open Document