Name: Rishabh Soni Student ID: 7636624 I pledge that I will neither give assistance to nor receive assistance from any other student during this examination. I also confirm that my examination responses are solely the results of my efforts during this examination period and that they do not include material copied and pasted from any external sources other than my own notes. Question 1 (1) Treviño and Brown identified five business ethics myths. I would like to discuss the second myth 2 which was “Unethical Behaviour in Business Is Simply the Result of "Bad Apples". Treviño and Brown challenge the common belief that ethical behaviour within an organization is solely the responsibility of top management. They argue that while top management plays a crucial role in setting the ethical tone and establishing policies, middle management also has a significant influence on practising ethical practices. According to the authors middle managers occupy a crucial position between top management and front-line employees. They interact directly with employees and are responsible for implementing organizational strategies, making them influential in shaping the ethical environment within their teams and departments. They have first-hand knowledge of the challenges faced by employees, allowing them to recognize potential ethical conflicts and proactively address them. I agree with their argument concerning this myth, While top management provides the overall direction and sets the ethical tone, middle managers are the ones who directly interact with employees and implement the organization's strategies. Due to their intimate knowledge of the daily operation and the specific challenges faced by employees, middle managers hold substantial influence over the ethical conduct within their teams. According to the article, the author mentioned the incident that happened in New Britain high school. The New Britain high school's allgirl drill team organized a scavenger hunt that resulted in the confiscation of a large collection of stolen items by the police. This surprised law enforcement, as the 42 girls involved were typically law-abiding. However, the girls themselves struggled to acknowledge their wrongdoing, believing it was acceptable based on the seniors' approval and their leadership roles. This indicates that seniors or subordinates can have a massive influence on their juniors, hence it’s not just top management's duty to enforce ethical behaviours. (2) Carroll Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility has 4 levels as follows: Economic Responsibility: Companies bear a fundamental obligation to secure profitability and create economic worth for their shareholders. This includes conducting business ethically, maximizing profits within legal boundaries, and providing a return on investment to shareholders. Legal Responsibility: Companies must operate within the laws and regulations set by society. They are expected to comply with legal requirements, such as labour laws, consumer protection laws, environmental regulations, and intellectual property rights. Ethical Responsibility: Companies have a responsibility to behave ethically and morally uprightly. This includes considering the impact of their actions on stakeholders, such as employees, customers, suppliers, and society. Ethical responsibility entails honesty, fairness, integrity, and respect for human rights. 1 Name: Rishabh Soni Student ID: 7636624 Philanthropic Responsibility: Companies have a discretionary responsibility to contribute to the well-being of society. This entails actively participating in endeavours and initiatives that promote the betterment of the community and address societal requirements. For example, charitable donations, volunteer work, and environmental sustainability efforts. I strongly agree with Economic responsibility and Legal Responsibility, these two aspects form the foundation of a business's operations and are crucial for its survival because without profit company wouldn’t exist. Profitability is essential for a company's sustainability while compliance with laws and regulations ensures that businesses operate within ethical and legal boundaries. According to the classroom discussions, there are no arguments when it’s illegal hence companies have legal responsibilities. Although I believe the Ethical and Philanthropic responsibilities are optional and conditional. It depends upon the situation and the company's field of work. They should work ethically but they aren’t bound to do so because their utmost priority is to make a profit and maintain a position in the market for their survival. Philanthropic responsibilities are optional and not mandated because they could survive in the market profitable even without contributing to human welfare. There are several reasons why a company would work to promote human welfare. Altruism, which aligns with the values of the firm, could be a form of advertising or maintaining a reputation. (3) In class, we discussed the recent Australian auditing scandal. Furthermore, Question 2 (1) Ashley Madison's practice of having men pay to communicate with chatbots raises ethical concerns and can be evaluated from different perspectives. Legally speaking, Ashley Madison included a warning in its "Terms" section that some profiles and communications may not be authentic or accurate or are for amusement and entertainment. This disclaimer was intended to inform customers about the potential existence of fictitious profiles or chatbots. Thus, from a legal perspective, they may not have done anything explicitly wrong. However, from an ethical standpoint, there are concerns about the transparency and manipulation involved in this practice. Despite Ashley Madison's disclosure of fictitious profiles, it remains uncertain to what extent customers were aware of or comprehended this disclaimer. There is a good possibility that the majority of the user didn’t carefully read or fully understand the terms and conditions, potentially leading them to unknowingly engage with chatbots. Moreover, the use of chatbots that could emulate human conversation could be manipulation or deception between genuine human interaction and bot communication. Customers might have been under the impression that they were in real conversations with other humans, when in fact, they were interacting with algorithms. According to deontological ethics, transparency is often linked to the principles of honesty, integrity, and respect. Deontology argues that individuals and organizations must be transparent in their actions and communications, as it upholds the principles of truthfulness and fairness. Transparency is seen as a moral obligation regardless of the consequences it may produce. Thus, according to this theory, Ashley Madison wasn’t transparent and communicated clearly with their customers. 2 Name: Rishabh Soni Student ID: 7636624 In addition to this, it can be argued that Ashley Madison's practice of having men pay to communicate with females was ethically questionable. According to the case, men had to pay five credits to initiate an email conversation whereas women could initiate the conversation for free. This challenges the theory of justice. According to Distributive justice, treat equals equally and unequal’s unequally. In this case, the fees were charged based on the gender of a person which was biased and contradicts distributive justice. Hence Ashley Madison was unethical to engage humans with automated bots. (2) Public transit vehicles are government-owned spaces that are available to serve human beings, including children and vulnerable populations. Elected officials may argue that they have a responsibility to ensure that advertisements displayed in such public spaces adhere to certain standards and do not promote offensive, discriminatory, or harmful content. These elected officials are responsible for maintaining the standards of advertisements and the officials stated that the advertisements were not consistent with the standards for the community. Adding to that, these advertisements can manipulate the audience in several ways including children. It is also the responsibility of elected officials to regulate public spaces in a manner that respects the rights and well-being of all citizens. As an elected government official, they have the right to reject the advertisement request thus it was justified. (3) According to me, hackers shouldn’t be praised for their public shaming incidents. Considering the importance of privacy and personal autonomy, the actions of hackers who publicly shame individuals by disclosing their names can be viewed as a violation of privacy rights. According to the theory of rights, everyone has the right to privacy (Negative rightsObligation to inaction). The right to privacy is a fundamental ethical principle that recognizes individuals' autonomy and the importance of personal boundaries. It asserts that individuals have the right to control and protect their personal information, and private spaces. Respecting the right to privacy entails refraining from unwarranted intrusion, surveillance, or disclosure of sensitive information without consent. Engaging in extramarital affairs is typically a personal matter that should be addressed within the context of personal relationships and private spheres. Publicly exposing individuals without their consent can have severe and long-lasting negative impacts on their personal and professional lives, potentially leading to reputational damage, relationship breakdowns, and emotional distress. Furthermore, It is crucial to carefully consider the ethical implications of vigilante justice. Engaging in activities like hacking into private systems and revealing personal information the law is illegal. It is important to acknowledge that the actions of hackers, irrespective of personal moral judgments, involved illegal activities and encroach upon privacy rights. 3
