Acknowledgement

Table of Contents
Acknowledgement...................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction of ethics.............................................................................................. 2
1.1What is ethics?................................................................................................... 2
1.2Approaches to ethics.......................................................................................... 2
1.3What use is ethics?............................................................................................. 3
1.4Ethics can provide a moral map.........................................................................3
1.5Ethics can pinpoint a disagreement...................................................................3
1.6Ethics doesn't give right answers.......................................................................4
1.7Ethics can give several answers.........................................................................4
1.8Business Ethics................................................................................................... 4
1.9The Meaning of Business Ethics.........................................................................4
2. Workplace Justice in ethics..................................................................................... 6
2.1Workplace Justice............................................................................................... 6
2.2Four Types of Justice........................................................................................... 7
Distributive justice.................................................................................................. 7
Procedural justice.................................................................................................... 7
Restorative justice................................................................................................... 7
Retributive justice................................................................................................... 8
3. Findings and results............................................................................................. 10
Recommendations.................................................................................................... 33
References................................................................................................................ 34
Appendices............................................................................................................... 35

1. Introduction of ethics

1.1What is ethics?

At its simplest, ethics is a system of moral principles. They affect how people make decisions
and lead their lives.
Ethics is concerned with what is good for individuals and society and is also described as moral
philosophy.
The term is derived from the Greek word ethos which can mean custom, habit, character or
disposition.
Ethics covers the following dilemmas:

how to live a good life

our rights and responsibilities

the language of right and wrong

moral decisions - what is good and bad?

Our concepts of ethics have been derived from religions, philosophies and cultures. They infuse
debates on topics like abortion, human rights and professional conduct.
1.2Approaches to ethics

Philosophers nowadays tend to divide ethical theories into three areas: metaethics, normative
ethics and applied ethics.

Meta-ethics deals with the nature of moral judgement. It looks at the origins and meaning
of ethical principles.

Normative ethics is concerned with the content of moral judgements and the criteria for
what is right or wrong.

Applied ethics looks at controversial topics like war, animal rights and capital
punishment

1.3What use is ethics?

Ethics needs to provide answers. Photo: Geoffrey Holman.

If ethical theories are to be useful in practice, they need to affect the way human beings behave.
Some philosophers think that ethics does do this. They argue that if a person realizes that it
would be morally good to do something then it would be irrational for that person not to do it.
But human beings often behave irrationally - they follow their 'gut instinct' even when their head
suggests a different course of action.
However, ethics does provide good tools for thinking about moral issues.
1.4Ethics can provide a moral map

Most moral issues get us pretty worked up - think of abortion and euthanasia for starters.
Because these are such emotional issues we often let our hearts do the arguing while our brains
just go with the flow.
But there's another way of tackling these issues, and that's where philosophers can come in - they
offer us ethical rules and principles that enable us to take a cooler view of moral problems.
So ethics provides us with a moral map, a framework that we can use to find our way through
difficult issues.
1.5Ethics can pinpoint a disagreement

Using the framework of ethics, two people who are arguing a moral issue can often find that
what they disagree about is just one particular part of the issue, and that they broadly agree on
everything else.

That can take a lot of heat out of the argument, and sometimes even hint at a way for them to
resolve their problem.
But sometimes ethics doesn't provide people with the sort of help that they really want.
1.6Ethics doesn't give right answers

Ethics doesn't always show the right answer to moral problems.

Indeed, more and more people think that for many ethical issues there isn't a single right answer just a set of principles that can be applied to particular cases to give those involved some clear
choices.
Some philosophers go further and say that all ethics can do is eliminate confusion and clarify the
issues. After that it's up to each individual to come to their own conclusions.
1.7Ethics can give several answers

Many people want there to be a single right answer to ethical questions. They find moral
ambiguity hard to live with because they genuinely want to do the 'right' thing, and even if they
can't work out what that right thing is, they like the idea that 'somewhere' there is one right
answer.
But often there isn't one right answer - there may be several right answers, or just some least
worst answers - and the individual must choose between them.
For others moral ambiguity is difficult because it forces them to take responsibility for their own
choices and actions, rather than falling back on convenient rules and customs

1.8Business Ethics

Business ethics is the accepted set of moral values and corporate standards of conduct in a
business organization. The specifics of what this actually means can vary from one organization
to another.

1.9The Meaning of Business Ethics

According to Kirk O. Hanson, a renowned ethics expert who also doubles as the Executive
Director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, "business ethics is the study of the standards
of business behavior which promote human welfare and the good."
Business ethics manifests both as written and unwritten codes of moral standards that are critical
to the current activities and future aspirations of a business organization. They can differ from
one company to another because of differences in cultural perspectives, operational structures
and strategic orientations. The guiding framework of business ethics permeates all levels of the
organization. It is about having the wisdom to determine the difference between right actions and
wrong decisions.
In simpler terms, business ethics fundamentally epitomizes the organization's codes of corporate
governance. It stipulates the morality standards and behavioral patterns expected of individuals
and the business as a whole. These moral benchmarks can be perceived in terms of the
microenvironment and macro environment of the business.

2. Workplace Justice in ethics

2.1Workplace Justice

Justice is the legal or philosophical theory by which fairness is administered. The concept of
justice differs in every culture. An early theory of justice was set out by the Ancient Greek
philosopher Plato in his work The Republic. Advocates of divine command theory argue that
justice issues from God. In the 17th century, theorists like John Locke argued for the theory of
natural. Thinkers in the social contract tradition argued that justice is derived from the mutual
agreement of everyone concerned. In the 19th century, utilitarian thinkers including John Stuart
Mill argued that justice is what has the best consequences. Theories of distributive justice
concern what is distributed, between whom they are to be distributed, and what is
the proper distribution. Egalitarians argued that justice can only exist within the coordinates of
equality. John Rawls used a social contract argument to show that justice, and especially
distributive justice, is a form of fairness. Property rights theorists (like Robert) take a
deontological view of distributive justice and argue that property rights-based justice maximizes
the overall wealth of an economic system. Theories of retributive justice are concerned
with punishment for wrongdoing. Restorative justice (also sometimes called "reparative justice")
is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of victims and offenders.
Greenberg (1987) introduced the concept of organizational justice with regard to how an
employee judges the behaviour of the organization and the employee's resulting attitude and
behaviour. (e.g., if a firm makes redundant half of the workers, an employee may feel a sense of
injustice with a resulting change in attitude and a drop in productivity).
Justice or fairness refers to the idea that an action or decision is morally right, which may be
defined according to ethics, religion, fairness, equity, or law. People are naturally attentive to the

justice of events and situations in their everyday lives, across a variety of contexts (Tabibnia,
Satpute, & Lieberman, 2008). Individuals react to actions and decisions made by organizations
every day. An individuals perceptions of these decisions as fair or unfair can influence the
individuals subsequent attitudes and behaviors. Fairness is often of central interest to
organizations because the implications of perceptions of injustice can impact job attitudes and
behaviors at work. Justice in organizations can include issues related to perceptions of fair pay,
equal opportunities for promotion, and personnel selection procedures

2.2Four Types of Justice

There are four types of justice that people can seek when they have been wronged.
Distributive justice
Distributive justice, also known as economic justice, is about fairness in what people receive,
from goods to attention. Its roots are in social order and it is at the roots of socialism, where
equality is a fundamental principle.
If people do not think that they are getting their fair share of something, they will seek first to
gain what they believe they deserve. They may well also seek other forms of justice.
Procedural justice
The principle of fairness is also found in the idea of fair play (as opposed to the fair share of
distributive justice).
If people believe that a fair process was used in deciding what it to be distributed, then they
may well accept an imbalance in what they receive in comparison to others. If they see both
procedural and distributive injustice, they will likely seek restorative and/or retributive justice.
Restorative justice

The first thing that the betrayed person may seek from the betrayer is some form of restitution,
putting things back as they should be.
The simplest form of restitution is a straightforward apology. Restoration means putting things
back as they were, so it may include some act of contrition to demonstrate one is truly sorry.
This may include action and even extra payment to the offended party.
Restorative justice is also known as corrective justice.
Retributive justice
Retributive justice works on the principle of punishment, although what constitutes fair and
proportional punishment is widely debated. While the intent may be to dissuade the perpetrator
or others from future wrong-doing, the re-offending rate of many criminals indicates the
limited success of this approach.
Punishment in practice is more about the satisfaction of victims and those who care about them.
This strays into the realm of revenge, which can be many times more severe than reparation as
the hurt party seeks to make the other person suffer in return. In such cases 'justice' is typically
defined emotionally rather that with intent for fairness or prevention.

2.3Ethics and justice

Ethics concerns what is morally right or wrong. Justice concerns what is legally right or wrong.
Ideally, justice is ethical, and one assumes that doing what is ethical is legal. Justice cares about
peoples rights, and righting wrongs when those rights are violated. Although Cain denied being
his brothers keeper, we expect ethical standards and administered justice to function as a
brothers keeper to someone (especially ourselves).
Justice can be restorative (compensatory), requiring the wrongdoer to restore the innocent victim,
to the extent possible, to the same (or a similar) condition the victim was in before the wrong
was committed (such as paying to repair damaged property, paying hospital bills, returning
stolen goods, etc.). Or, justice can be punitive (penal), punishing the criminals, as a matter of

social morality, for the wrong committed (involving jail time, fines, loss of a drivers license, a
criminal record, or even capital punishment).
2.4Antecedes of justice perception

1.Employee Participation
Extent to which employee feel that they are involved in decision making or other organizational
procedures. (GreenBerg & Folger, 1983;Bies & Shapiro, 1988)
2.Leadership
In just and Ethical Environment, the decisions that the leaders make reflects fair treatment of
People and Concerned for their welfare.(B.Charles tatum, 2003). 3. Communication
It is important that the information provided be accurate, timely and helpful in order to impact on
justice perception to be positive(Schwiger and Denisi,1991).
3..Justice Climate
Team level Perception form what is called a justice climate which can impact individuals own
views of Justice.(LI and Cropanzano,2009).
4.Counterproductive work behavior
Increased the judgement of procedural injustice, for instance, can lead employee willingness to
comply with an organizations rules.
5.Absenteesism and withdrawal
Failure to receive a promotion is an example of a situation in which feelings of injustice may
result in an employee being absent from from work without reason.

3. Findings and results

The questionnaires were filled IGI insurance and 20 respondents was chosen for this study and
after thorough evaluation of questionnaire the final results are.
Spss is used for Calculating the results.

Demographics:

GENDER
Frequency Percent
Valid MALE 9
45.0
FEMAL 11
55.0
E
Total

20

100.0

Valid

Cumulative

Percent
45.0
55.0

Percent
45.0
100.0

100.0

AGE
Percent
Frequency
Valid 20 TO 25
2
10.0
26 TO 35
15
75.0
36
AND 3
15.0
ABOVE
Total

20

100.0

Valid

Cumulative

Percent
10.0
75.0
15.0

Percent
10.0
85.0
100.0

100.0

Q1 My work schedule is fair

Q1

Valid STRONGLY
DISAGREE
DISAGREE
SOME

Valid

Cumulative

Frequency Percent
2
10.0

Percent
10.0

Percent
10.0

2
4

10.0
20.0

10.0
20.0

20.0
40.0

55.0
5.0
100.0

55.0
5.0
100.0

95.0
100.0

WHATAGREE
AGREE
11
STRONGLY AGREE 1
Total
20

Q2. I think that my pay is fair.

Q2

Valid STRONGLY
DISAGREE
DISAGREE
SOME

Valid

Cumulative

Frequency Percent
3
15.0

Percent
15.0

Percent
15.0

2
9

10.0
45.0

10.0
45.0

25.0
70.0

25.0
5.0
100.0

25.0
5.0
100.0

95.0
100.0

WHATAGREE
AGREE
5
STRONGLY AGREE 1
Total
20

Q3. I consider my work load to be quite fair.

Q4. I feel that my job responsibilities are quite fair.

Q4
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
4
SOME WHATAGREE 6
AGREE
8
STRONGLY AGREE 2
Total
20

Percent
20.0
30.0
40.0
10.0
100.0

Valid Percent
20.0
30.0
40.0
10.0
100.0

Percent
20.0
50.0
90.0
100.0

Q5.Overall the rewards I receive are quite fair.

Q5
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
5
SOME WHATAGREE
6
AGREE
8
Total
20

Percent
5.0
25.0
30.0
40.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
25.0
30.0
40.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
30.0
60.0
100.0

Q6 Job decisions are made by my supervisor in a biased manner.

Q6
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
4
SOME WHATAGREE
6
AGREE
8
STRONGLY AGREE
1
Total
20

Percent
5.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
5.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
5.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
25.0
55.0
95.0
100.0

Q7.My supervisor makes sure that all employee concerns are heard before Job decisions are
made
Q7
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
3
SOME WHATAGREE
4
AGREE
10
STRONGLY AGREE
2
Total
20

Percent
5.0
15.0
20.0
50.0
10.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
15.0
20.0
50.0
10.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
20.0
40.0
90.0
100.0

Q8. My supervisor clarifies decisions and provides additional information when requested by
employees.
Q8
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 2
DISAGREE
5
SOME WHATAGREE
3
AGREE
10
Total
20

Percent
10.0
25.0
15.0
50.0
100.0

Valid Percent
10.0
25.0
15.0
50.0
100.0

Percent
10.0
35.0
50.0
100.0

Q9.To make job decisions, my supervisor collects accurate and complete information.Q9
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
4
SOME WHATAGREE 4
AGREE
11
STRONGLY AGREE 1
Total
20

Percent
20.0
20.0
55.0
5.0
100.0

Valid Percent
20.0
20.0
55.0
5.0
100.0

Percent
20.0
40.0
95.0
100.0

Q10. All job-related decisions are applied consistently to all affected employees.
Q10
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
1
SOME WHATAGREE
6
AGREE
10
STRONGLY AGREE
2
Total
20

Percent
5.0
5.0
30.0
50.0
10.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
5.0
30.0
50.0
10.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
10.0
40.0
90.0
100.0

Q11
Employees are allowed to challenge or appeal job decisions made by their supervisors.
Q11
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
3
SOME WHATAGREE
6
AGREE
10
Total
20

Percent
5.0
15.0
30.0
50.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
15.0
30.0
50.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
20.0
50.0
100.0

Q12 When decisions are made about my job, the manager treats me with kindness and
consideration.
Q12
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
8
SOME WHATAGREE
3
AGREE
8
Total
20

Percent
5.0
40.0
15.0
40.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
40.0
15.0
40.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
45.0
60.0
100.0

Q13 When decisions are made about my job, the manager is sensitive to my personal needs.
Q13
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 2
DISAGREE
7
SOME WHATAGREE
2
AGREE
9
Total
20

Percent
10.0
35.0
10.0
45.0
100.0

Valid Percent
10.0
35.0
10.0
45.0
100.0

Percent
10.0
45.0
55.0
100.0

Q14 When decisions are made about my job, the manager deals with me in a truthful
manner.
Q14
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
4
SOME WHATAGREE
6
AGREE
8
STRONGLY AGREE
1
Total
20

Percent
5.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
5.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
5.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
25.0
55.0
95.0
100.0

Q15 When decisions are made about my job, the manager shows concern for my rights as an
employee.
Q15
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
2
SOME WHATAGREE 9
AGREE
9
Total
20

Percent
10.0
45.0
45.0
100.0

Valid Percent
10.0
45.0
45.0
100.0

Percent
10.0
55.0
100.0

Q16 When decisions are made about my job, the manager is sensitive to my personal needs
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
3
SOME WHATAGREE 6
AGREE
11
Total
20

Percent
15.0
30.0
55.0
100.0

Valid Percent
15.0
30.0
55.0
100.0

Percent
15.0
45.0
100.0

Q17 Concerning decisions made about my job, the manager discusses with me the implications
of the decisions.
Q17
Cumulative

Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
4
SOME WHATAGREE 5
AGREE
10
STRONGLY AGREE 1
Total
20

Percent
20.0
25.0
50.0
5.0
100.0

Valid Percent
20.0
25.0
50.0
5.0
100.0

Percent
20.0
45.0
95.0
100.0

Q18 The manager offers adequate justification for decisions made about my job.

Q18
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
2
SOME WHATAGREE 8
AGREE
10
Total
20

Percent
10.0
40.0
50.0
100.0

Valid Percent
10.0
40.0
50.0
100.0

Percent
10.0
50.0
100.0

Q19 When making decisions about my job, the manager offers explanations that make sense
to me.
Q19
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
DISAGREE
3
SOME WHATAGREE 12
AGREE
5
Total
20

Percent
15.0
60.0
25.0
100.0

Valid Percent
15.0
60.0
25.0
100.0

Percent
15.0
75.0
100.0

Q20 My manager explains very clearly any decisions made about my job.
Q20
Cumulative
Valid

Frequency
STRONGLY DISAGREE 1
DISAGREE
2
SOME WHATAGREE
5
AGREE
12
Total
20

Percent
5.0
10.0
25.0
60.0
100.0

Valid Percent
5.0
10.0
25.0
60.0
100.0

Percent
5.0
15.0
40.0
100.0

Recommendations

Organization should have to develop some SOPs regarding justice.

There should Monthly checks on justice implications.
There should be punishments for Favoritism.
Organization Should encourage Employees to Rise voice against an unethical and
injustice activity.

References

http://business.lovetoknow.com/wiki/A_Definition_for_Business_Ethics
https://www.google.com.pk/?gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=qrUwV6juJoTvugSlkJqgBw
http://www.slideshare.net/anumitu/organizational-justice-28423611

Appendices