Ethics and morality analysis of organizational decision-making

Ethics and Morality Case Analysis

Morality concerns moral conduct or standards and determines how good or bad one's conduct is (Perle 2004). Ethics, on the other hand, is the study of standards of conduct. Most agree that morality is ethics in action so that these two terms are at times used interchangeably. The study of conduct, also referred to as moral philosophy, is divided into descriptive, normative, analytical and applied categories (Fieser 2006). Descriptive ethics describes human behavior. Normative ethics establishes norms on human conduct. Analytical ethics or metaethics investigates how people determine norms of their own behavior for themselves. And applied ethics investigates specific controversial issues, using the conceptual tools of analytical and normative ethics. Examples of these controversial issues are abortion, homosexuality and capital punishment (Perle, Feiser).

The most commonly used principles in settling applied ethics controversies, such as sexual morality or homosexuality, concern personal benefit, social benefit, benevolence, paternalism, honesty, harm, lawfulness, autonomy and justice (Fieser 2006). An applied ethics issue or controversy must involve significant groups of people favoring and opposing the issue and must distinctively be a moral issue. Many such issues may be controversial and have a significant impact on society, but they are not all moral issues. Some may only be issues of social policy. A social policy intends that a particular society run efficiently and undertakes measures to achieve this aim. For example, it devises conventions and laws, such as those covering taxes, zooming and traffic. Moral issues, on the other hand, involve universal practices, such as the duty of honesty. These practices are not confined to individual groups or societies. Oftentimes, issues of social policy and morality overlap while remaining distinct. Many still consider homosexuality immoral and that social policies should regulate sexual conduct or that laws should punish sexual promiscuity. This would be theoretically easy to do. But many contradicting normative principles produce opposite conclusions. The result is a want of a single, definite procedure for determining the morality of a given issue. The usual approach today is to consult or apply many representative normative principles, which affect the issue, and to discover where the weight of evidence lies most strongly (Fieser).

Decision - Kirkham McDowell Securities as an underwriting and financial advisory firm sells services (Williamson 1993) through its sales personnel whose reputation must be beyond reproach before its clients if it must remain competitive. Adam deserves to be honored for his valued contribution to the firm in a fitting occasion despite his unexpected revelation of having a gay partner whom he intends to bring to the occasion. In order to prevent taking the unnecessary risk of offending some clients moral sensitivity towards homosexuality, the company will cancel the banquet through some valid excuse and make its silver anniversary just an inter-office event.

Standard of Conduct

The central issue is Adam's homosexuality, which is an applied ethics issue because homosexuality is a moral issue, not only in business but also universally. Times may have changed a lot. With increasing numbers of gay people turning up in recent years, homosexuality has become commonplace. Gay communities have formed and lobby for their rights. By sheer and growing numbers, gays and lesbians command a place in society and thus a claim of having been accepted. But on the whole, they are still frowned upon. Homosexuality is still generally rejected as a form of sexual immorality despite gay people's assertion that they have the fundamental right to make their own gender preferences, which society must accept. Businesses exist for profit. To this end, it must balance its goals and practices to the values and preferences of its clients and the needs and rights of its employees. But because a business cannot thrive outside society, society's norms and prohibitions still influence a business' standard of conduct as an organization. Despite a constant revolution of sexual values, a business remains bound to the beliefs, attitudes and prejudices of the larger society. The larger society stubbornly believes that sexual union is intended by nature only for a man and a woman who are married to each other and for the main, if not sole, purpose of procreation.

Adam tells his boss, George, that success in their work largely depends on the openness of the relationship between the management and the employees and the management and its clients. That openness now brings him before George to let him know that he is gay and that he intends to bring his partner, Robert, to the silver anniversary dinner. George's reaction spans from surprise to growing resistance. After gaining a hold of himself from the surprise, he expresses anti-homosexuality sentiment in a polite way by asking why Adam wants to mix his personal and professional lives at this most important time. The objection evolves in George's mind as he is now able to consider that the firm has a secure position in its market. Its clients include established and successful regional companies and major influential and conservative leaders who are expected to attend the dinner. Many of them will be morally offended by the presence of Robert as Adam's partner, presented as such. George can imagine how it embarrassing it will be to the company when it happens.

Increased tolerance towards sexual immorality and gender preference in the outside world now allows secret gays to come out of the closet and admit and practice their preferred lifestyle less secretly. But this tolerance should not be construed as approval. Despite widespread tolerance, homosexuality has not been legally sanctioned by established institutions. That tolerance extends to a business organization, where people are bound together by a common purpose of making money. That money comes from clients whom the organization must struggle to keep. Keeping them includes not offending their moral sensitivities in matters like homosexuality. This practice is, therefore, not a defensible one.

The dinner is a yearly celebration of company success and management intends to use it as a fitting occasion for honoring its achieving sales staff, which includes Adam. Despite the difficulty situation it now finds itself in, the company acknowledges that Adam has the personal right to a gender choice. But the moral preferences of the firm's clients are of greater significance than Adam's individual personal right to a gender choice. Bringing a gay partner to the dinner is not an obligation to Adam, but it is the firm's obligation to observe the clients' moral preferences. In addition, these moral preferences still prevail in the larger society in which the business exists and which it must first serve.

Adam's revelation of his being gay is only a claim to a personal choice for another man, which society's prevailing moral values continue to reject as something wrong. Admitting it openly does not make it a virtue like honesty. A virtue is the practice of something good. But since homosexuality is still considered inherently wrong or evil, admitting it does not make it a virtue even in the highly tolerant American society.

Even within the business organization, Adam does not have the true right to expect acceptance of his gender preference from other employees who already know about it and have met his partner at some socials. Some of the employees may find it objectionable but feel that they cannot do anything about it. Others may simply be indifferent. But heterosexual employees with strong moral values will not be comfortable with a homosexual pair in their company even only during socials. In time, Adam's different sexual preference will create tension and prejudice among co-employees who are straight for the simple reason of opposing sexual orientations. Adam's gender choice breaches the standard of conduct within and without the firm.

Character, Virtue and Relationship

Efficiency and dedication are virtues every business organization must cultivate and encourage among its employees. Kirkham McDowell Securities wants to honor Adam and his associates for their efficiency, dedication and accomplishments in bringing in profits to the company. But decency as a desirable trait in the workplace becomes a problem when Adam volunteers the information about his being gay and about bringing his partner to the dinner. It is not prudishness, which makes George question Adam's decision to mix his personal and professional lives and to bring the matter up at this time. Rather, it is his sense of decency, which makes him object. George belongs to the majority, who still believes that homosexuality is sexual immorality and that sexual immorality is inherently wrong, no matter how much tolerance it generates. In addition, George wants to protect the business and the relationship it has securely established with its clients. Most of these clients hold time-honored conservative moral values like he does He is inclined to protect the business by not exposing these clients to a situation, which will offend their moral values.

At the same time, George recognizes that, as an efficient and dedicated employee, Adam must be honored and rewarded. He also agrees with Adam that the relationship between the management and employees must be characterized by openness in order to succeed. He appreciates Adam's forthrightness about his being gay and what he intends to do during the planned dinner where he will be honored. He would have heard about it from other employees who already know about it. But Adam has the courage to inform him about it directly and George appreciates this trait of directness. However, what Adam has the courage to directly to George pits it against moral sexual values and business interests. It creates a burden and a need to change plans for the silver anniversary in order to fulfill two major goals.

George's problem is not the result of poor relationship from his end. He has communicated effectively with Adam with regard to his work. Adam has been adequately motivated and he has achieved impressive results. But he has kept his gay identity from George who makes the decisions. Instead, Adam has made it known to other employees but they do not make the decisions and are not inclined to squeal about it to George. Adam reveals his identity to George now that the details of the anniversary dinner have been set and important clients are expected to attend. Caught in the quandary, George must now weigh his sense of fairness to recognize Adam's achievement against the moral sensitivities of clients who will be offended by the presence of Adam's lover during the planned dinner. George cannot choose from these two considerations but fulfill both and in a way that is satisfactory to both sides.

George may decide to speak individually with the other sales persons who have been exposed to the presence of Robert and elicit the impact of Adam's identity on them. As the manager, George has the authority and privilege to acquire information on matters, which affect employee working conditions. Confidential consultations like these foster honesty and good will. Employees are encouraged to reveal how other employees make their working relations easier or more difficult. George can discover their viewpoints on homosexuality too. He can elicit the reactions of these employees' spouses to the presence of Robert during their dinners or Adam's being gay. These employees have as much right to their moral belief against homosexuality as Adam has in favor of it. George will impress upon them that the company recognizes their right to a workplace where decency is truly observed. George will determine the extent to which Adam's gay practice has affected the productivity and comfort of other employees and make a decision from there.

A ly, George will reflect on his own biases and the extent to which his handling of this issue is influenced by personal biases. He will examine the grounds of his personal moral beliefs along with the company's mission, objectives, policies and set of moral values. If they agree, he will the measure these beliefs and values against Adam's importance to the company and the negative effects of his gender preference. He will then evaluate the probable consequences of the change of plans for the silver anniversary dinner. When he gets the sincere answers to these inner questions, then he is ready to take the proper steps.

George will first call Adam to a one-on-one and confidential meeting. First, George will inform Adam of the change of plans for the silver anniversary dinner. Second, George will relay to Adam how the other employees really feel about Robert's presence during their socials. This closed-door meeting will be different from the one where Adam caught George by surprise with his revelation. George will emphasize the primacy of decency in the company's dealings with clients and the dealings among employees. He will also emphasize the value of efficiency, determination, courage, straightforwardness and justice to the company. Then he will express the company's recognition of his valuable contribution and plan to proceed with a dinner, which will be an inter-office event only.

Adam will ask questions and even make some objections during this meeting. George will exhibit the same forthrightness shown by Adam the first time. George will follow the same path as Adam's argument that success in their organization depends on an open attitude between management and its employees. With all possible tact and respect, George will straightforwardly express due recognition for Adam's contribution and value to the company. He will then state the mission and goals of the company to both serve the best interests of clients, which include respecting their moral sentiments, and, at the same time, the welfare of its employees. George will inform Adam that he has studied the situation in consultation with major participants in the matter. George will then inform Adam that he has decided to change anniversary plans to avoid the risk of offending clients' moral values in the event that he brings Robert to the planned dinner. Whether Adam raises objections or not, George will tell him categorically that his gender preference is an issue in the firm at the present time. He will tell him that he is free to choose a different or opposing lifestyle but he should also consider the impact of his choice upon those who sincerely do not share his belief. He will explain how the culture of business exists within the culture of the larger society. His lifestyle may be gaining increasing acceptance but, in the larger society, it is only at best tolerated. George will stick to facts and try to refrain from making biased comments. He will try to make Adam understand that his choices are not without consequences and effects, whether in the workplace, among clients or in the larger world. George will not question the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality and Adam's basis for his gender choice. But he will call attention to the rightness or wrongness of Adam's placing undue pressure on those who do not share his gender preference, whether in the workplace, among clients or in the outside world. George will tactfully explain to Adam that the courage to reveal his homosexuality and partner to a major business event is not equivalent to honesty. It may constitute openness in that the other parties to an agreement are informed about one's personal preferences and people who are important to him. Adam's revelation does not stop at being just a revelation. Those who do not share his moral beliefs will be affected. George at this point will mention the sentiments of other employees who are secretly offended by Adam's open practice of homosexuality. Then he will explain how the company mission, objectives and policies underlie an implied commitment to decency or established sexual norms. The company's major clients also hold this commitment, bound to or guided by the same sexual norms. Although Adam has confined Robert's appearance to socials, George will explain that relationships among employees extend to socials or even when work is interrupted. The planned silver anniversary dinner would have been a very large form of socials with clients where working relationships would have been at stake if the company took the risk of offending moral sensitivities by allowing Robert's presence.

Purposes and Consequences

The priority goals are to preserve the company reputation of decency with clients in order to retain their patronage and to proceed to honor and reward the valuable contributions of the firm's employees in a fitting occasion. The decision to convert the dinner into an inter-office event will realize both objectives.

The first action is to notify the clients that the firm is changing its silver anniversary into an inter-office event. A valid excuse may be a change of venue to a distant resort or the house blessing of one of the officials, which will not accommodate a large group. This may be the first time the company anniversary will be held without clients' presence but it will be worth the exception. In the meantime, the company will work out the organizational changes needed to respond to the issue. When settled, the succeeding anniversaries can include clients again.