1
A MODEL FOR ETHICAL DECISION MAKING
The Model
Geva has proposed model for ethical decision models. The model has the following
components
1. Introductory phase: framing the ethical issue
2. Phase 1: Principle-based evaluation
3. Phase 2: Virtue-based solution
4. Phase 3: Contract-based decision
Introductory phase: framing the ethical issue
At this stage, “the decision maker must gather and process information about alternative
courses of actions, their feasibility, their outcomes, and the tradeoffs between potential
benefits and costs associated with them. The kind of reasoning used in the introductory
phase of decision making is practical judgments, which is quite different from theoretical
reasoning, such as deductive logic.”(Geva, p. 783)
Phase 1: Principle-based evaluation
In this Phase, judgment is made in regard to the action to be taken. To evaluate the
action, standards of morality and standard for operating in international business will be
used.
To make a normative analysis of the action, this phase uses standards of morality, also
called approaches to moral evaluation. The standards of morality suggested by Geva
(4) are utilitarianism, deontology, and justice. Instead I will use the following standards
proposed by Cavanagh, Moberg, and Velasquez (1995): utilitarianism, rights and duties,
justice and caring. Rawls has indicated that deontology includes all theories except
utilitarianism.
In addition to the standards of morality, one needs to add another item when engaged in
international business. One has to consider the local practice which is relevant to the
problem or the case but considered questionable in the home country. The question
relevant to such practice, as suggested by Donaldson (pp. 104-105) is stated as follows:
Could one engage in business in the host country without getting involved in such a
practice.
The standards of morality and the question related to international business will be
referred to in this paper as Standards.
If these Standards are in conflict some priority rules might be used to determine which
standard has priority and resolve the conflict. If the conflict is not resolved, then go to
Phase 2. If the conflict is resolved and If these Standards produce the same judgment
on the action, then the judgment is considered ethical.
Before implementing the action one has to determine whether the action has no
compliance problem and conforms to social contract norms.
2
Compliance problem means that the Standards produce an ethical judgment, but the
actor is facing difficulty in making the action required by the Standard. When a
compliance problem is faced, one has to proceed to Phase 2. Otherwise one would
proceed to Phase 3.
If there is a conflicting judgment among the standards of morality, and the conflicting
judgments cannot be resolved, the action need to be examine in Phase 2. A decision
maker has to make a decision cannot stop at the conclusion that standards of ethics
produce conflicting judgment on the action contemplated.
An example of an action which cannot be resolved at this stage is the firing of
employees when a company faces a decline in economic activities.
Phase 2: Virtue-based solution
The emphasis in this phase is on the actor and not on the action in an attempt to
resolve the conflicting judgments obtained in Phase 1. At this phase, the problem or
action is examined from a different point of view; namely, the actor using virtue ethics.
At this phase the actor would use the creativity and imagination to redefine the problem
in order to reduce or eliminate the ethical problem.
Geva presents four creative strategies to be used in this Phase:
1. The fresh solution strategy, the collective action strategy.
2. The collective action strategy.
3. The specification strategy
4. Institutionalizing ethics.
If the actor is successful, the action should be implemented if it conforms to social
contract norms covered in Phase 3. Otherwise, the action cannot be pursued.
Phase 3: Contract-based decision
Donaldson and Dunfee indicate that there are two types of social contract, one is
hypothetical or macro and the other is extant or micro. The first refers to “hypothetical
agreements among rational people”( Donaldson and Dunfee, p.19) and the second
“refers to nonhypothetical, actual (although typically informal) agreements existing
within and among industries, national economic systems, corporations, trade
associations, and so on. For example, the ethical principles accepted by accountants or
lawyers reflect “micro” or “extant” social contracts”( Donaldson and Dunfee, p. 19)
If the action conforms to the accepted standards of the reference group, then the action
should be implemented, if not there is a need to find an acceptable norm before
implementing the action.
3
Illustrations and Additional Comments
Introductory phase: framing the ethical issue
Example: Morality of random drug testing in the work place
1. Possibility: Is it really possible to establish a fair and accurate testing program? Do
standard testing programs also detect the use of prescription drugs and over-thecounter drugs, and should the use of these drugs be taken into account? What
safeguards against unfairly administered tests are necessary.
2. Alternatives. Are there alternative policies, other than random drug testing, to deal
with on-the-job drug abuse? How is drug abuse related to job performance? Is drug
use truly a significant problem in this specific workplace?
3. Conflicts. Does the potential harm attributable to drug use in this workplace
outweigh the employees’ right to privacy? The right to due process? Is random
drug testing in harmony with the company’s core values?
4. Effects. What possible problems may result from the decision to conduct random
drug testing? May random drug testing lower employee moral? Induce employee
discrimination? Spur new conflicts? Cause other negative side effects? Such
questions require credible answers before the decision to conduct random drug
testing can be morally assessed.
The type and scope of the information gathered define the decision maker’s problem
space, which is assumed to have a crucial influence on how the moral problem is
solved. There is no simple answer to the question “What are the relevant facts and how
many are enough to permit a proper analysis of the problem at hand?” It is important,
however, that information gathering not be confined to prevalent alternatives, but also
expanded to take possible courses of action into consideration. A wider vision of the
problem sets the stage for creative ethical solution when needed.”(Geva, p. 785).
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism “is a general term for any view that holds that actions and policies should
be evaluated on the basis of benefits and costs they will impose on society. In any
situation the “right” action or policy is the one that will produce the greatest net benefits
for the lowest net costs(when all alternatives have only net costs)” (Velasquez, p. 72).
Rights and Duties
“A person has a right when that person is entitled to act in a certain way or is entitled to
have others act in a certain way toward him or her.” Velasquez, p. 87).
“Rights are powerful devices whose main purpose is that of enabling the individual to
choose freely whether to pursue certain interests or activities and of protecting those
choices.” Velasquez, p. 87).
4
“The most important moral rights……are rights that impose prohibitions or requirements
on others and which thereby enable individuals to choose freely whether to pursue
certain interests or activities.” Velasquez, p. 88). These rights have three features
which are considered important.
“First moral rights are tightly correlated with duties.” Velasquez, p. 88).
“Second, moral rights provide individual with autonomy and equality in the free pursuit
of their interests.” Velasquez, p. 89).
“Third, moral rights provide a basis for justifying one’s actions and for invoking the
protection or aid of others.” Velasquez, p. 89).
Justice
“Justice and fairness are essentially comparative. They are concerned with the
comparative treatment given to the members of the group when benefits and burdens
are distributed, when rules and laws are administered, when members of a group
cooperate or compete with each other, and when people are punished for the wrongs
they have done or compensated for the wrongs they have suffered.” Velasquez, p. 103).
“Standards of justice are generally taken to be more important than utilitarian
considerations.” Velasquez, p. 103).
“But standards of justice do not generally override the moral rights of individuals.”
Velasquez, p. 103).
There are three categories of justice.
“Distributive justice … is concerned with the fair distribution of society’s benefits and
burdens.” Velasquez, p. 104).
“Retributive justice … refers to the just impositions of punishments and penalties upon
those who do wrong: A “just” penalty is one that in some sense is deserved by the
person who does wrong.” Velasquez, p. 104).
“Compensatory justice …concerns the just way of compensating people for what they
lost when they were wronged by others: A just compensation is one that in some sense
is proportional to the loss suffered by the person being compensated (such as loss of
livelihood). Velasquez, p. 104).
Care
“According to this “care” view of ethics, the moral task is not to follow universal and
impartial moral principles, but, instead, to attend to and respond to the good of particular
concrete persons with whom we are in a valuable and close relationship. Velasquez, p.
122).
“.. not all relationships have value and so not all would generate the duties of care.
Relationships in which one person attempts to dominate , oppress, or harm another,
5
relationships that are characterized by hatred, violence, disrespect and viciousness, and
relationships that are characterized by injustice, exploitation, and harm to others lack
the value that an ethic of care requires.” Velasquez, p. 142).
“…it is important to recognize that the demand of caring are sometimes in conflict with
the demands of justice.” Velasquez, p. 142).
Virtue
“A moral virtue is an acquired disposition that is valued as part of the character of a
morally good human being and that is exhibited in the person’s habitual behavior. A
person has a moral virtue when the person is disposed to behave habitually in the way,
and with the reasons, feelings, and desires, that are characteristics of a morally good
person.” Velasquez, pp. 132-133).
“…the virtues can be seen as providing a perspective that surveys the same ground as
the four approaches, but from an entirely different perspective. What the principles of
utility, rights, justice, and caring do from the perspective of action evaluations, an ethics
of virtue does from the perspective of character evaluations.” Velasquez, p. 132).
References
Donaldson, Thomas, The Ethics of International Business. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1989.
Donaldson, Thomas and Thomas W. Dunfee, Ties That Bind. Boston, Massachusetts:
Harvard Business School Press, 1999.
Geva, Aviva, Moral Decision Making In Business: A Phase-Model. Business Ethics
Quarterly. Oct. 2000, v. 10, no. 4, pp. 773-803.
Velasquez, Manuel G., Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1998.