Business Communication,
Business Communication,
Ethics and Practice
Team Project/Topic: Analyze the McWane Inc. case by using the two Ethical Frameworks: Consequences and Duties
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The report looks at the way in which the ethical frameworks of consequence and duty apply to McWane Inc. (McWane). McWane is a manufacturer of water and sewerage piping operating both within and outside the United States.McWane gained notoriety in 2003 when it became the subject of an investigation by the US TV series PBS Frontline. The program “A Dangerous Business” accused the company of being one of the most dangerous work places in the US. The show documented that the company had amassed more safety violations in the period 1995 to 2003 than all of its six major competitors combined.
In addressing a serious issue such as worker safety, the ethical dilemmas can be resolved using the principles of two major theories, being utilitarianism and deontology.Utilitarianism looks at the consequences of decisions and actions and determines that the most appropriate should be those that do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In contrast, deontology looks at the duty that faces the person responsible for the action or decision. Deontology denies the utilitarian belief that the ends do justify the means. It holds that there are some things that we should or should not do regardless of the consequences.
When these frameworks are applied to the situation at McWane, it is easy to conclude that the utilitarian approach has been more prominent than the deontological approach. This is further illustrated when McWane is compared to American Cast Iron Pipe Company (ACIPCO), which undoubtedly follows the deontological approach.Both frameworks have their advantages and disadvantages and parts of each framework should be used to resolve any ethical dilemma. However, it could be concluded that the situation of McWane could have called for a greater emphasis on the deontological
Ethics and Practice
Team Project/Topic: Analyze the McWane Inc. case by using the two Ethical Frameworks: Consequences and Duties
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The report looks at the way in which the ethical frameworks of consequence and duty apply to McWane Inc. (McWane). McWane is a manufacturer of water and sewerage piping operating both within and outside the United States.McWane gained notoriety in 2003 when it became the subject of an investigation by the US TV series PBS Frontline. The program “A Dangerous Business” accused the company of being one of the most dangerous work places in the US. The show documented that the company had amassed more safety violations in the period 1995 to 2003 than all of its six major competitors combined.
In addressing a serious issue such as worker safety, the ethical dilemmas can be resolved using the principles of two major theories, being utilitarianism and deontology.Utilitarianism looks at the consequences of decisions and actions and determines that the most appropriate should be those that do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In contrast, deontology looks at the duty that faces the person responsible for the action or decision. Deontology denies the utilitarian belief that the ends do justify the means. It holds that there are some things that we should or should not do regardless of the consequences.
When these frameworks are applied to the situation at McWane, it is easy to conclude that the utilitarian approach has been more prominent than the deontological approach. This is further illustrated when McWane is compared to American Cast Iron Pipe Company (ACIPCO), which undoubtedly follows the deontological approach.Both frameworks have their advantages and disadvantages and parts of each framework should be used to resolve any ethical dilemma. However, it could be concluded that the situation of McWane could have called for a greater emphasis on the deontological
References: DesJardins, J. 2006, An Introduction to Business Ethics, 2nd Ed, McGraw-Hill, Boston. Duty. (2009), In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, viewed 4 September 2009, <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duty> Johnson, C. E., 2007, Ethics in the Workplace – Tools and Tactics for Organizational Transformation, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California. Mill, J. 1861, Utilitarianism, page reference in the text is to the reprint in Mill, J. ,2002, Utilitarianism, Sher, G. (ed), Indianapolis: Hackett. Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A., 1995, Managing Business Ethics – Straight Talk about How to do it Right, John Wiley & Sons, New York.