WELCOME FOR THE FIRST SESSION OF THE COURSE CIVIL SERVICE ETHICS AND PROFESSIONALISM

INSTRUCTOR INFORMATION
Name Merga Mekuria BA in Business Administration MBA ( Masters of Business

Administration) PHD student in Management Faculty member of IPMDS My office # 307, old bldg Telephone Ext. 307

Reflection on the meaning of ethics

What does ethics mean to you? Doing what my feeling tells me as right or wrong Living according to my religious beliefs Acting as the law requires Doing what the society accepts I dont know

But being ethical is not the same as Doing what our feelings tell us because there are times when feeling goes against ethics Nor is it equivalent to religious standards for it doesnt consider atheists/non believers

 Is not the same as laws for laws some

times consist unethical articles e.g. apartheid laws, slavery laws, laws that discriminate people by sex, race , color etc Is not equivalent to societal norms because there are times when standards of society totally deviate from what is ethical and due to the fact that there is no social consensus on what is right or wrong. e.g polygamy, Homosexuality, Adultery, Corruption etc

What then is ethics?

Ethics is two things;

First, ethics refers to wellfounded/well-substantiated/ standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues.

 Ethics, for example, refers to those

standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. Ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy.

 Such

standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and wellfounded reasons. Secondly, ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As mentioned above, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and

Ethics also means, then, the

continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based

Four main aspects of the application of morality

Religious morality is concerned with

human beings in relationship to supernatural being or beings. Morality and nature are concerned with human beings in relationship to nature. Individual morality is concerned with human beings in relationship to themselves Social morality is concerned with human beings in relationship to other human beings. This is the most important category of all.

Leading Theories of Ethics

The

field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. As a division of philosophy, ethics does its work primarily through critical reasoning.

 Its aim is to describe and explain how

people actually behave and think when dealing with moral issues and concepts. This kind of empirical research is usually conducted by sociologist, anthropologists, etc. In contrast, the focus of moral philosophy is not what people actually believe and do, but what they should believe and do. The point of inquiry is to determine what actions are right or wrong and what things are good or bad.

Classification of ethical theories

Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas:
Meta-ethics, Normative ethics, and Applied ethics.

Classification of ethical theories

Metaethics

Normative ethics

Applied ethics

 Meta-ethics investigates where our ethical

principles come from, and what they mean. it answers questions like, are they merely social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our individual emotions? Meta-ethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves

 Normative ethics takes on a more

practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire (virtues) the duties that we should follow the consequences of our behavior on others

Finally,

applied ethics involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion , animal rights, environmental concerns, homosexuality, or nuclear

By using the conceptual tools of Meta-

ethics and normative ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these controversial issues. The lines of distinction between Meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry/unclear/. For example, the issue of abortion is an applied ethical topic since it involves a specific type of controversial behavior.

But it also depends on more general

normative principles, such as the right of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for determining the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests on Meta-ethical issues such as, where do rights come from? and what kinds of beings have rights?

Normative Theories of Ethics ( leading theories)

20

 Normative ethics is a search for an ideal litmus

test of proper behavior. The Golden Rule is a classic example of a normative principle: We should do to others what we would want others to do to us. Since I do not want my neighbor to steal my car, then it is wrong for me to steal her car. Since I would want people to feed me if I was starving, then I should help feed starving people. Using this same reasoning, I can theoretically determine whether any possible action is right or wrong.
21

Normative Ethics
Based on the Golden Rule, it would also be wrong for me

to lie to, harass, victimize, assault, or kill others. This golden rule is an example of a normative theory that establishes a single principle against which we judge all human actions or behavior. Other normative theories focus on a set of foundational principles or good character traits. The key assumption in normative ethics is that there is only one ultimate criterion of moral conduct, whether it is a single rule or a set of principles. Only three categories of normative theories will be noted here: 1. Virtue theories 2. Duty theories/non-consequentialist theories 3. Consequentialist theories
22

 Virtue ethics is a theory of morality that

Virtue theories: Being a good person

makes virtue the central concern. Virtue: the quality of moral excellence, righteousness, and responsibility---a specific type of moral excellence or other exemplary quality considered meritorious; a worthy practice or ideal. The emphasis is on the good or virtuous character of human beings themselves, rather than on their acts or the consequences of their acts, or feelings, or rules.
23

VirtueWho should I be?

Good character ethics does not start from

the question, what should I do? Instead, who should I be? Being does not ignore what we do. Virtues, therefore, make us good and cause our actions to be good. A virtue is a stable disposition to act and feel according to some ideal or model of excellence. It is deeply embedded character trait that can affect actions in countless situations.
24

Difference: Being good and Doing good

Doing good: a single action at a given moment. Doing good is focused on the activity itself. It can be a sporadic or irregular act. Being good: focused on who someone is or on the character of a person. On one hand, doing good is more than just a sporadic act or occasional good deeds such as donating aid to orphans. Doing good is the activity itself at a specific time. Whereas, being good is the predisposition or tendency to do good things. It is an internal motivation that drives one not only to do the right thing but also the love to do what is right.
25

 Virtue ethics says that a person both

can and should have character qualities such as courage, selfdiscipline and benevolence. This stems from the belief in ethical truth which sees a real difference between good and evil, and between good people and evil people. The goal here is to be a good person. This involves possession of all the traits above and others as well.
26

In general
Many philosophers believe that morality

consists of following precisely defined rules of conduct, such as dont kill, or dont steal. Presumably, I must learn these rules, and then make sure each of my actions live up to the rules. Virtue ethics, however, places less emphasis on learning rules, and instead stresses the importance of developing good habits of character, such as benevolence/kindness.

Virtue
Once Ive acquired benevolence, for example,

I will then habitually act in a benevolent manner. Historically, virtue theory is one of the oldest normative traditions in Western philosophy, having its roots in ancient Greek civilization. Plato emphasized four virtues in particular, which were later called cardinal virtues: wisdom, courage, temperance and justice. Other important virtues are fortitude, generosity, self-respect, good temper, and sincerity.

Virtue
In addition to advocating good

habits of character, virtue theorists hold that we should avoid acquiring bad character traits, or vices, such as cowardice/fearfulness/, insensibility, injustice, and vanity.
Virtue theory emphasizes moral education since virtuous character traits are developed in ones youth. Adults, therefore, are responsible for instilling

Virtue
Aristotle argued that virtues are good habits

that we acquire, which regulate our emotions. For example, in response to my natural feelings of fear, I should develop the virtue of courage which allows me to be firm when facing danger. Analyzing 11 specific virtues, Aristotle argued that most virtues fall at a mean between more extreme character traits. With courage, for example, if I do not have enough courage, I develop the disposition of cowardice, which is a vice. If I have too much courage I develop the disposition of rashness which is also a vice.

Virtue
According to Aristotle, it is not an easy task to find the

perfect mean between extreme character traits. In fact, we need assistance from our reason to do this. After Aristotle, medieval theologians supplemented Greek lists of virtues with three Christian ones, or theological virtues: faith, hope, and charity. Interest in virtue theory continued through the middle ages and declined in the 19th century with the rise of alternative moral theories below.

Why be virtuous?
Goodness is necessary for a good life. A good

life is not fame or wealth but a life lived in accordance with reason. A balanced life governed by virtue means everything is functioning as it should be (Plato). The result of living a virtuous life is eudemonic (the state of wellbeing) - a balanced life so arranged that it allows an individual to achieve the highest levels possible for a human being. The moral actions of a virtuous life are likely to result in happiness and success.
32

Duty Theories/deontology: Do your duty

Deontology concerns the study of the nature of duty and obligation where: Actions are judged solely on whether they are right. People are judged solely on whether they are good. Judgments of actions and people should be based on some higher standards of morality rather than on the consequences of a persons actions.
33

Duty Theories/deontology: Do your duty

It begins by identifying general types of behavior or rules of conduct as intrinsically right or wrong and then defines right action in a specific situation as what best confirms to this set of moral rules Under this theory let us see the two categories: Kants Theory Natural Law Theory

Deontology..act with good will.

Kants Ethics Immanuel Kant (1724 1804) argued that reason alone leads us to the right and the good. Assumptions: Right actions have moral value only if they are carried out in good will- that is, a will to do your duty for dutys sake. To act with a good will is to act with a desire to do your duty simply because it is your duty, to act out of pure reverence/respect for the moral law. So to do right, we must do it for dutys sake, motivated solely by respect for the moral law (Contrast abuse of power and manipulation of decision-making using ones status).
35

Kants theory
Therefore, without good will any virtuous

action has no moral worth even if it accords with moral law or produces good results. Good will is a precondition. Example Consider the case where a driver respects traffic regulations where traffic policies are there and does not where traffic polices are not available. Which action is right? Would there be any consistency in this kinds of practice?

Deontology.. hypothetical or categorical imperatives.

Doing good involves carrying out duties. Duties are

governed by imperatives /rules or commands . Imperatives and rules tell us what we ought to do right motivated by respect for the moral law. Kant defines moral law as a set of principles, or rules, stated in the form of imperatives, or commands. Imperatives can be either hypothetical or categorical, A hypothetical imperative tells us what we should do if we have certain desires: for example if need money, work for it. Or if you want orange juice, ask for it. We should obey such imperatives only if we desire the outcomes specified. A categorical imperative, however, is not iffy. It tells us that we should do something in all situations regardless 37of

Categorical rulesby universal maxim.

According to Kant, ought statements or imperatives have

ethical meanings, when they satisfy a test of reason. However, an a moral categorical imperative expresses a command like Do not steal or Do not commit suicide. Such imperatives are universal and unconditional, containing no stipulations contingent on human desires or preferences. Kant says that moral law consists entirely of categorical imperatives. They are the authoritative and dependable expressions of our moral duties. Because they are the products of rational insight and we are rational agents, we can straight forwardly access, understand, and know them as the great truths that they are. It tells us to act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. 38

Categorical rules
To apply the first version of the hypothetical imperatives, imagine that

you want to borrow money from someone, and you know you will not be able to repay the debt. You also know that you will get the loan if you falsely promise to pay the money back. Is such deceptive borrowing morally permissible? To find out, you have to devise a maxim for the action and ask whether you could consistently will it to become a universal law? Could consistently will everyone to act on the maxim if you need money, make a lying promise to borrow some ? Kants emphatic answer is no. if all person adopt this rule, then they would make lying promises to obtain loans. But then everyone would know that such promises are false, and the practice of giving loans based on a promises are false, and the practices of giving loans based on a promise would no longer exist, because no promises could be trusted. The maxim says that everyone should make a false promise in order to borrow money, but then no one would loan money based on a promise. If acted on by everyone, the maxim would defeat itself. 39

Categorical rulesthe means-end principle

Kants second version of the categorical imperative is

probably more famous and influential than the first. He declares, So act as to treat humanity, whether in thin own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end, never as means only. This rule - the means-end principle says that we must always treat people (including ourselves) as ends in themselves, as creatures of great intrinsic worth, never merely as things of instrumental value, never merely as tools to be used for someone elses purpose. The means-end principle indicates that persons

have intrinsic value and dignity because they, unlike the rest of creation, are rational agents who are free to choose their own ends, legislate their own moral laws, and assign value to things 40 in the world.

Categorical rulesthe means-end principle

Kants idea is that people not only have

intrinsic worth-they also have equal intrinsic worth. Each rational being has the same inherent value as every other rational being. This quality of values cannot be changed by, and has no connection to, social and economic status, racial and ethnic considerations, or the possession of prestige or power. Any two people are entitled to the same moral rights, even if one is rich, wise, powerful, and famous-and the other is not.

Categorical rulesmeans-end maxim.

To treat people merely as a means rather than as

end is to fail to recognize the true nature and status of persons. Since people are by nature free, rational, autonomous, and equal, we treat them merely as a means if we do not respect these attributes. If we, for example, interfere with peoples rights to make informed choices by lying to them, we thereby inhibit their free and autonomous actions. According to Kant, lying or breaking a promise is wrong because to do so is to use people merely as a means to an end, rather than as an end in themselves. Sometimes we use people to achieve some end, yet our actions are not wrong. To see why, we must understand that there is a moral 42 difference between treating persons as a means

Categorical rules
We may treat a mechanic as a means to repair our cars, but

we do not treat him merely as a means if we also respect his status as a person. We do not treat him only as means if we neither restrict his freedom nor ignore his right. As noted earlier, Kant insists that the two versions of the categorical imperative are two ways of stating the same idea. But the two principles seem to be distinct, occasionally leading to different conclusions about the rightness of an action. The maxim of an action, for example, may pass the first version (be possible) by being universal but fail the second by not treating persons as end. A more plausible approach is to view the two versions not as alternative tests but as a single two- part test that an action must pass to be judged morally permissible. So before we can declare a maxim a universal categorical imperative, we must know that it would have us treat persons not only as a means but as end.
43

For example consider Bernard Gert's Ten moral rules ( categorical imperatives)

Don't Kill Don't cause pain Don't Disable Don't deprive of freedom Don't deprive pleasure Don't deceive Keep your promise Don't cheat Obey the Law Do your duty

Natural law theory

Right actions are those that accord with the natural

law-the moral principle that we can read clearly in the very structure of nature itself, including human nature. It is based on the notion that right actions are those that accord with natural law-the moral principles embedded in nature itself. How nature is reveals how it should be. The inclination of human nature reveals the value that human should live by.

Natural law theory

Aquinas, who gave us the most influential form of

natural law theory, says that humans naturally incline toward preservation of human life, procreation, the search for truth, neighborhood, and kindness and reasonable behavior. Like Kants theory, traditional natural law theory is absolutist, maintaining that some actions are always wrong. These immoral actions include directly killing the innocent, interfering with procreation, and lying.

Natural law theory

The theorys absolutist rules do

occasionally conflict, and the proposed remedy for any such inconsistencies is the doctrine of doubt effect. The principle applies to situations in which an action produces both good and bad effect. It says that performing a good action may be permissible even if it has bad effect, but performing a bad action for the purpose of achieving good

Natural law theory

Despite the doubt-effect doctrine,

the theorys biggest weakness is still its absolutism, which seems to mandate actions that conflict with our considered moral judgments. In some cases, for example, the theory might require someone to allow hundreds of innocent people to die jus to avoid the direct killing

3. Consequentialism theory
According to consequentialism, correct moral conduct is determined solely by a cost-benefit analysis of an actions consequences: Consequentialism: An action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable. Consequentialist normative principles require that we first tally both the good and bad consequences of an action. Second, we then determine whether the total good consequences outweigh the total bad consequences. If the good consequences are greater, then the action is morally proper. If the bad consequences are greater, then the action is morally improper.

Three subdivisions of consequentialism emerge

Ethical Egoism: an action is morally right if the

consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable only to the agent performing the action. Ethical Altruism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone except the agent. Utilitarianism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable to everyone.

Three subdivisions of consequentialism emerge

Utilitarianism says that acts are morally right

when they succeed in bringing about a desired result. The result that should be desired is happiness, because it alone is intrinsically good. Acts are good when the result is happiness, evil when the result is unhappiness. Even the theory goes to the extent that greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore, utilitarianism acknowledge that happiness for all 'can not be achieved in every situation.

Consequentialism theory
All

three of these theories focus on the consequences of actions for different groups of people. But, like all normative theories, the above three theories are rivals of each other. They also yield different conclusions. Consider the following example. A woman was traveling through a developing country when she witnessed a car in front of her run off the road and roll over several times. She asked the hired driver to pull over to assist, but, to her surprise, the driver accelerated nervously past the scene.

Consequentialism theory
A few miles down the road, the driver

explained that in his country if someone assists an accident victim, then the police often hold the assisting person responsible for the accident itself. If the victim dies, then the assisting person could be held responsible for the death. The driver continued explaining that road accident victims are therefore usually left unattended and often die from exposure to the countrys harsh desert conditions.

Consequentialism theory
On the principle of Ethical egoism, the woman in this illustration

would only be concerned with the consequences of her attempted assistance as she would be affected. Clearly, the decision to drive on would be the morally proper choice. On the principle of Ethical altruism, she would be concerned only with the consequences of her action as others are affected, particularly the accident victim. Tallying only those consequences reveals that assisting the victim would be the morally correct choice, irrespective of the negative consequences that result for her. On the principle of utilitarianism, she must consider the consequences for both herself and the victim. The outcome here is less clear, and the woman would need to precisely calculate the overall benefit versus cost of her action.

RELIGIOUS ETHICS
The outlook in religious theory of ethics is that 'right' is what my religious tradition teaches. This is the most dominant theory, which has its root in the morale philosophy of many persons. Many people find the teachings of their religious denominations to be the major sources of ethical guidance and instruction. For example, Christians and Jews consider that right and wrong are determined by the teachings of the Bible. Likewise, Muslims refer to the Qur'an, and Hindus and Buddhists look to their sacred texts of their traditions as sources of ethical guidelines.

RELIGIOUS ETHICS
Major ethical teachings of most religious sects are largely compatible with secular, or rational ethical views. For example, almost all religious codes condemn violence, fraudulence or cheating, and theft. Many religious teachings involve what is called 'supererogatory' behavior. Supererogatory is a form of conduct that is beyond the call of duty and not necessarily opposed to required secular standards. Corollary to supererogatory principles, Jews, Christians and Muslims often feel that they are called for a higher standard of charity or justice than secular ethics seem to demand. There is no serious problem with these higher standards.

RELIGIOUS ETHICS
Nevertheless, leaving ethical principles at the discretion of religious tradition and scared scripture or teachings has serious problem. There are ample chances of conflicts between religious teachings and secular duties. For example, can any Catholic or Muslim researcher working in a drug laboratory cooperate in the development of a new abortion drug. Some writers on ethical discourses vehemently argue that no religious teaching or scripture is selfexplanatory or universally acceptable. Every sacred scripture or teachings need interpretation, and when this is so there must be some independent rational basis for judgment (Green, 1994).

RELIGIOUS ETHICS
It is such secular and rational interpretation that would serve as ethical guidelines in contexts of diverse and competing religious background. Example Dont drink or dont get drunk Dont wish or dont commit adultery Dont break promise Dont cheat

The formation of individual ethics

Individual ethics

Ones own family

Peer influence

Ones own situation Situation

Ones own Exper ience

ones own value and moral standards

Characteristics of Ethics
has an overwhelming impacts: There is nothing like ethics, poor or good, which have such enormous consequences on the fate of mankind or even a nation. Positive impacts: No society can flourish without having a cohesive basic ethics at its foundation. Example: The fast economic development in East Asian countries; The economic development of European countries Negative Impacts: Poor ethical judgments by ruthless people can cripple a nation. Example: World War I and II, Rwandan massacre, The agony of peoples in Sierra Leone, DRC and Southern Sudan
1. Ethics

Characteristics of Ethics
2. Ethics is of transcending characteristics : Ethics cuts across

human civilization, culture, ideology, and religious creeds. Ethics is at the core of every religion. Every religion has a code of ethics, which can easily be put as the 'Golden Rule.' 3. The nexus between public service and ethics: Concerning the nexus between public service and ethics we can safely argue that public service cannot properly function without ethics. Ethical values are not distinguishable conceptually or in practice from the civil service function. Public service is inherently an ethical enterprise. Public servants are protectors of the public interest (guardians of public interest). 4. Globally, there is unanimous acceptance that ethics really matter above all things.

ETHICS IN MANAGEMENT
Ethics are principles of conduct used to govern the

decision-making behavior of an individual or group of individuals ( managers). Making these decisions have significant implications for the organization and its stakeholders. Ethics can affect managerial work in any number of ways, but three areas are of special concern: Relationship of the organization to the employee How the organization treats its employees could be an area of special concern regarding managerial ethics. Humanity as a means only or as an end ( from recruitment to separation).

ETHICS IN MANAGEMENT
Relationship of the employee to the organization

Conflicts of interest, absence of loyalty, secrecy, and honesty could be cited as examples of ethical issues in the case of employees of an organization. Misusing organizational information and secrets would also be unethical. Relationship of the organization to others Accepted ethical standards demand that products offered to the customers or clients should be safe, be accompanied by appropriate information on product features, uses, and limitations and not be unreasonably priced.

Case analysis; case 1

Imagine that for more than a year

a terrorist has been carrying out devastating attacks in a developing country, killing hundreds of innocent men women, and children. He seems unstoppable. He always manages to escape capture.

case 1
In fact, because of his furtiveness, the expert

assistance of a few collaborators, and his support among the general population, he will most likely never be captured or killed. The authorities have no idea where he hides or where he will strike next. But they are sure that he will go on killing indefinitely. They have tried every tactic they know to put an end to the slaughter, but it goes on and on. Finally, as a last resort, the chief of the nations antiterrorist police orders the arrest of the terrorists family a wife and seven children.

case 1
The chief intends to kill the wife and three of the

children right away (to show that he is serious), then threaten to kill the remaining four unless the terrorist turns himself in. There is no doubt that the chief will make good on his intentions, and there is excellent reason to believe that the terrorist will indeed turn himself in rather than allow his remaining children to be executed. Suppose that the chief has only two options: (1) refrain from murdering the terrorists family and continue with the usual antiterrorist tactics (which have only a tiny chance of being successful) or (2) kill the wife and three of the children and threaten to kill the rest (a strategy with a very high chance of success).

Required
Which option do you recommend and why? (use

theories to justify the righteousness of each option) Argue on case If option one is the case many lives are going to be lost Is option two the basic issue is violated

Case 2
This time you are to imagine yourself to be a surgeon, a truly great surgeon. Among other things you do, you transplant organs, and you are such a great surgeon that the organs you transplant always take. At the moment you have five patients who need organs. Two need one lung each, two need a kidney each, and the fifth needs a heart.

Case 2
If they do not get those organs today, they

will all die; if you find organs for them today, you can transplant the organs and they will all live. But where to find the lungs, the kidneys, and the heart? The time is almost up when a report is brought to you that a young man who has just come into your clinic for his yearly checkup has exactly the right blood type, and is in excellent health.

Case 2
So, you have a possible donor. All you need do is cut him

up and distribute his parts among the five who need them. You ask, but he says, Sorry. I deeply sympathize, but no. Would it be morally permissible for you to operate anyway? This scenario involves the possible killing of an innocent person for the good of others. There seems little doubt that carrying out the murder and transplanting the victims organs into five other people (and thus saving their lives) would maximize utility (assuming, of course, that the surgeons deed would not become public, he or she suffered no untoward psychological effects, etc.) compared to the happiness produced by doing the transplants, the unhappiness of the one unlucky donor seems minor.

Required
Does the saving of the five patients life justify

the murder of one healthy person? How do you justify?

Case 3
Once up on a time a a certain tax auditor in EIRA

consciously exaggerate the taxes to be paid by XYZ company i.e. Birr 2.8 million by overstating the annual income of the company. The general manager of the company was confused about the situation and claims that there is something wrong which the auditor has to correct. However the tax auditor asked the company to pay him birr 700,000 in the form of bribe so that the tax will be as minimum as he wants. The manager however told him that birr 700,000 is too much and that he wouldnt do this. Since the auditor insisted on his claim, the manager as a last resort agreed to pay him birr 50,000 in the form down payment and he in meanwhile took the case to the FEACC and let the auditor be caught while he receive birr 50,000 as a down payment.

Required
Was the manger right or wrong?

Right from Wrong from

What is wrong if the auditor gets 700,000

and company saves itself from unnecessary tax liability?

Questions for discussion

What is the basic principle of normative ethics against which all human action is to be judged? Explain your answer using practical examples. 2. Explain the relevance of the following categories of normative theories to ethics in public service delivery a) Virtue theories. b) Immanuel Kants theory of ethics
1.

Wrong

Right

Unit two: Ethics and social responsibility (Overview)

Social responsibility refers to the role of an

organization in solving current social issues over and above legal requirements. Ethics are held and followed by individuals and that organizations do not have ethics except that they have to relate to their environment in ways that may involve ethical dilemmas and decisions.

Overview
Social responsibility is the obligation of an

organization to protect and enhance the societal context in which the organization functions. Today, there is little doubt that an organization must involve itself in social issues broader than producing and selling goods and services, not only because it is the ethical thing to do but also because it is in the best interest of the organization.

Overview
At this juncture, the relationship between

a managers ethical standards and social responsibility should be apparent. Ethics serve as basis for assessing the rightness of potential actions. In a sense, ethical standards are filters that screen actions according to relative rightness. An organization is a means for achieving the ends of various claimants.

Overview
Social responsibility involves

deciding what means and whose ends are right and good. Ultimately, it is the task of organizational managers to decide the relative rightness of each demand; and ethical standards are the bases for their decisions.

Claimants
Government

Civil servant

Citizen

The different aspects of social responsibility

According to Donnelly, three different views are held in defining (or explaining) the meaning of social responsibility. Social Responsibility as Social Obligation According to this view, an organization engages in socially responsible behavior when it pursues its purposes (what it is intended to do) within the constraints of law as imposed by society. For example, a business firm is established (entrusted by law) to make profits for its owners. In this case, because society supports business by allowing it to exist, business is obliged to repay society for that right by making profits.

The different aspects of social responsibility

Thus, legal behavior in pursuit of

objectives is socially responsible behavior, and any behavior not legal is socially irresponsible. Any behavior not in pursuit of profit in the case of a business firm, for example is socially irresponsible, because a business firm is given the right by the law to make profits.

Social responsibility as social reaction

A second meaning of social responsibility is behavior that is in

reaction to currently prevailing social norms, values, and performance expectations. This pervasive view emphasizes that society has expectations for organizations and organizational behavior that goes beyond the provision of goods and services. At minimum, an organization must be accountable for the ecological, environmental, and social costs incurred by its actions; at maximum an organization must react and contribute to solving society's problems (even that can not be directly attributed to the organization). The essence of this view of social responsibility is that organizations are reactive. Demands are made of them by certain groups, and the firms are socially responsible when they react, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, to satisfy these demands. This meaning is unsatisfactory for those who believe social responsibility should refer to proactive behavior.

Social responsibility as social responsiveness.

According to this view, socially responsible behaviors are

anticipatory and preventive rather than reactive and restorative. The term social responsiveness has become widely used in recent years to refer to actions that go beyond social obligation and social reaction. The characteristics of socially responsive behavior include taking stands on public issues, accounting willingly for actions to any group, anticipating future needs of society and moving toward satisfying them, and communicating with government regarding existing and anticipated socially desirable legislation. The social responsiveness view is the broadest meaning of social responsibility. It places managers and their organizations in a position of responsibility far removed from the traditional one of being concerned solely with economic means and ends. Social responsiveness approach to social responsibility is superior to a social obligation or social reaction perspective.

Organizational constituents

Employees Owners/ investors Federal Government Customers suppliers local community Interest groups Local government

organization

Specific Socially Responsible Activities

Organizations can translate their abstract concepts of social responsibility into concrete expressions through specific, deliberate activities.19 An organization (particularly a business organization) can take socially responsible actions in its product line by manufacturing (producing) safe, reliable, and high quality product (goods or services). An organization can be socially responsible in marketing its goods or services (for example, an organization should be truthful in advertising products, setting reasonable prices)

Specific Socially Responsible Activities

An organization can be socially responsible in

areas of environmental control (for example, by avoiding pollutions) An organization can be socially responsible in areas of employment and advancement of minorities or women (organizations should focus on hiring these groups of the society) An organization can be socially responsible in areas of employee relations, education, benefits, and satisfaction with work, safety and health.

Managing Social Responsibility

Many writers argue that social responsibility is a complex issue. To deal with it adequately, organizational managers need to approach it like any other business problem. Managers should view social responsibility as a basic issue of business organizational activity that requires careful planning, decision making, consideration, and evaluation. There are two basic methods of managing social responsibility.20 Formal activities Informal activities.

Formal organizational Activities

A variety of formal organizational activities can be employed in managing social responsibility. These efforts can generally be categorized in to three basic areas. Legal compliance Ethical compliance Philanthropic giving

Legal compliance
Legal compliance refers to the extent to which an

organization complies with (adhere to) local, regional, federal, and international laws. The management of this compliance is generally entrusted to the appropriate managers. For example, the finance manager is generally responsible for ensuring compliance with government finance regulations, the purchasing officer is generally responsible for ensuring compliance with government purchasing regulations,

Legal compliance
the human resources manger is responsible for

ensuring compliance with regulations related to recruitment, selection, remuneration, promotion, dismissal, and other personnel activities. The legal department (service) of an organization is involved in this area as well. This department may provide general oversight and also is likely to answer queries from different managers about the appropriate interpretation of various laws and regulations.

Ethical compliance

Ethical compliance refers to the extent to which an organization and its members follow basic ethical standards of behavior. Currently, many organizations have already started doing many things in the areas of ethical compliance. Some of the activities include providing training in ethics and developing guidelines and codes of conduct. Such activities greatly serve to enhance ethical compliance. Organizations can also establish formal ethics committees which may help in maintaining certain levels of ethical standards.

Philanthropic giving
Philanthropic giving involves the providing

of funds or other resources to charities or other worthy causes. Some organizations (especially, business organizations) allocate some percent of their incomes (profits) to help philanthropic organizations.

Informal Organizational Activities

In addition to those formal methods of managing social responsibility, there are also some informal mechanisms. The two most important mechanisms are indicated below. The organizations culture The basic culture and leadership practices of an organization can play strong role toward defining the nature of social responsibility adopted by an organization and its members. Some organizations have a culture of going into the community surrounding them. The members of such organizations, for example, campaign to construct and repair houses of the poor in the community. Whistle- blowing An informal organizational activity that affects social responsibility and the organizations response to it is whistle blowing. Whistleblowing occurs when an employee discloses illegal or unethical conduct by others within the organization.