Sustainable Management Futures Samples for Students-Myassignment

Question: Critically Evaluate a Particular Case Involving a Corporation of your Choosing from the Perspectives of Business Ethics. Answer: Introduction The report is aimed at evaluating the Phillip Morris campaign on anti-smoking for youths using contrasting models of business ethics like Deontology and Virtue ethics. The theories of the two models are explained in details, which are followed by the analysis of the campaign based on the viewpoints of the two theories. A brief overview of Phillip Morris Phillip Morris is the leading brand of tobacco in the world. It is a USA based global tobacco company. Out of the top 15 international brands of cigarettes, this company owns six. Their markets are spread worldwide in more than 180 countries. One of the most popular cigarette brands of this company is Marlboro. They have forty-eight production houses in 32 different countries. Before March 2008, it was working under the Altria group, which focuses only on the United States. After that, the Altria group allowing it to expand its business worldwide in all emerging markets withdrew the legal constraints on Phillip Morris. The companys corporate headquarters are in New York while the operations are headed from Lausanne Switzerland. Their product is based on tobacco, which is a big cause of deadly diseases (Pmi.com, 2017). As a result, the company is facing many legal problems from governments of countries around the globe. Phillip Morris started the business in London in 1847. It was the n a small tobacco shop at the London Bond Street. Later it expanded its business to the US. In 1919, George J. Whelan purchased the US branch of Phillip Morris and named it Phillip Morris and Company Ltd. Inc. n 1925 Marlboro cigarette was introduced with the tag line mild as may. It is considered as the turning point of the company. In 1931, Reuben M. Ellis and Leonard B. Mc Kitterick took over the charge of the company. In 1933, the Phillip Moris English blend cigarette was launched. In 1936 the company becomes the 4th largest manufacturer of cigarettes by selling 7.5 billions of it. In 1945 the Axton-Fisher tobacco company was acquired. Cigarette consumption dropped drastically post-World War II in 1945. In 1955, the Marlboro brand was reinvented with an American Cowboy theme. In 1960, the company became the leading exporter of tobacco in the US. George Weissman, the man responsible for this huge growth was appointed as the director of international operations of the company. In 1970, Miller Brewing was acquired. In 1975, the company released the Merit cigarette brand for the lower levels of the society. In 1999, the official website of the company was launched admitting that the consumption of tobacco can cause cancer and thus can lead to death. In April 2014, the company shut down is Moorabbin plant in Australia due to the decrease of sales and the legal restrictions imposed by the Australian government on health issues (Pmi.com, 2017). In 2015, the sale of cigarettes by this company was 850 billion. Some of the multimillion brands of Phillip Morris are Marlboro, Dji Sam Soe 234, LM, Longbeach, ST Dupont Paris, and U Mild. In the following sections of the report, the theoretical approaches of Deontology and Virtue Ethics are discussed in details. The strengths and weaknesses of each of these theories are also focused upon. In the Analysis section of the report, an analysis has been made on the viewpoints of these two theories on tobacco industries in general. This is followed by the analysis of the Phillip Morris campaign on the ethical grounds provided by these theories. In the Conclusion part, these two theories are compared and the contradictory findings are been discussed in order to evaluate the final understanding. Theoretical / Conceptual Approaches Figure 1: Theoretical / Conceptual Approaches of Ethical Theories (Source: Botan and Hazleton, 2010, p.22) Deontology (Ethics of duties) Deontological ethics or deontology refers to the ethics followed when a person is bound by duty (Sparks and Pan, 2010). It is based on the principle that rules bind individuals to do their duties properly. According to this theory, the right or wrong is decided at the point where the action is taken. It is not decided by the right or a wrong consequence that takes place as result of these actions (Trevino and Nelson, 2010). Strengths of Deontology Deontological ethics has certain principles, which are considered, as its areas of strength. The main strength is that it justifies a good motive even if the consequences are not good enough. Similarly, an unethical motive cannot be justified even if its results are good (Markard et al. 2012) According to this theory the consequences cannot be controlled but the actions can be. This theory considers all people equal and worthy of protection. Justice should not be denied even if it proves unprofitable for the mass (Aguinis and Glavas, 2012). Moral values should always be maintained even if it goes against time and tide. It encourages the following of ethics without thinking of the consequences (Gray and Schein, 2012) Weaknesses of Deontology The principles of deontology are not considered as practical when it comes to the real world scenarios. The decision-making is influenced by many more factors rather than just considering the duty as the main motive. It is not practical to consider only doing well when the outcomes can be disastrous (Miller et al. 2012). People do not blindly follow ethics without knowing what they are doing and why they are doing. This concept does not motivate to take decisions on the ground of sympathy or compassions (van Dijk et al. 2012). Morality cannot be defined as the set of rules that need to be followed irrespective of any situation. Real experiences decide what sort of actions to be taken (Rossouw et al. 2010). For example committing suicide is not considered as morally good but for a depressed person, it may seem like the last and the most reasonable way of escaping. Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics considers the moral character of a person carrying out the action rather than the action or the duties performed by the individual (Griseri and Seppala, 2010). The consequences of the action are also not taken into consideration. Virtue ethics serves as a guidance of the moral characteristics an individual should possess to be a good person (Carroll and Shabana, 2010). It also evaluates the rightness or wrongness of the actions performed by a person. According to this, a person cannot be classified as immoral depending on an action taken in compliance with a situation. This is very relevant with social structure since people are always prone to assassinate someone's character without judging the situation, which forced the person to take the action (Arnold et al. 2010). Punishing a person for an unlawful act only deters the situation. On the other hand correcting a person helps to build a good and healthy society. A virtue is a moral characteristic that an individual ne eds to practice to be called virtuous (Crane and Matten, 2016). Strengths of Virtue Ethics This theory deals with the characteristic traits a person possesses to make the lives of other people good and healthy. A virtuous person can treat another person with compassion, love, and respect. According to this theory, a person having good virtues is always drawn to do good things to others since these characteristics are inbuilt within that person (Brenkert, 2010). This is a contradiction to deontology, which states that person is bound by duty and is forced to do good things. Virtue ethics states that characteristics like generosity, honesty, compassion and so on are already present in a human being. It just needs to be nurtured and practiced every day to be a good human being and also help the society to be a better place to live in. It gives importance to thinking of others first over ones own interest (Nga and Shamuganathan, 2010). This theory has no defined principles on morality and is not categorized as good or bad. So it does not increase the complexity of a situation. As compared to other confusing theories, this theory considers the totality of a person to judge its morality. Another very strong principle of virtual ethics is that it considers the moral character of the person and is not concerned with the obligations or duties. This allows a person to act according to its moral values and not just simply follow the rule. It allows people to take care and be sensitive towards personal relationships and have high regard for others in the society. This theory teaches people to be happy and content with what they possess. This prevents individuals to get corrupted to fulfil their dreams of power and luxury. Weaknesses of virtue ethics Virtual ethics lacks focus on determining which act to be considered as good and which to be considered as bad. It only focuses on the qualities an individual possess to make him or her a morally good person. It does not consider the grounds on which the action is been taken (Brammer et al. 2012.). For example, murder is considered as an immoral act, irrespective of the situation on which it has occurred. Another weakness of this theory is that the moral values and practices change from people to people coming from different culture and different type of societies. Something, which can be good to some people, can be considered as a bad practice in other societies. This increases differences of opinions among people. This theory is considered as self-centred because it concentrates on the personal character of the individual without considering the effects of the actions on other people. Critics find this theory misguiding because it also supports the person whose actions are immoral and can be harmful to the society (Kitzmueller and Shimshack, 2012). According to this theory, the person needs to be corrected and not punished. Since this theory concentrates on the individual characteristics and not on the broader section of the society, it is considered as one of its greatest weaknesses. Analysis For analyzing the viewpoints of deontology and virtue ethics, the Phillip Morris anti-smoking campaign is selected as a material. It is such a situation which can be considered as moral as well as immoral on the same grounds. So it serves as a great source for studying the comparisons of viewpoints of the two contrasting ethical approaches. Phillip Morris has invested $300 million on anti-smoking programs and campaigns for youth. The very popular tagline for this campaign is "Think. Don't smoke." It has arranged for more than 130 programs in more than 70 countries. It has build partnerships with schools, colleges, and universities to spread this awareness targeting the youth. The campaign began as a part of the $206 billion agreement made by major tobacco companies including Phillip Morris, to educate the young mass about the dangers of tobacco (Pmi.com, 2017). Deontological view on the Phillip Morris Campaign Deontology states that the intentions with which the actions are performed decide whether the action is good or bad. Suppose a person kills someone. Killing is the consequence of the action taken. If the killing has been done deliberately then the action is considered as unethical. On the other hand, if the killing was accidental then the action is not considered as unethical (Gotsis and Kortezi, 2010). It classifies duties in two parts. The general duties that we do towards others like not lying, helping others when needed. The cigarette is the only legal product which can harm the population even causing deaths. The nicotine that is present in tobacco is highly addictive. It is considered as highly addictive as heroin or cocaine. As a result, it becomes very difficult for smokers to quit smoking. Smoking tobacco is the cause of more than forty deadly diseases all over the world. According to research, one of every smoker who is addicted for a long time die a premature death. Therefore, according to deontology selling any product, which causes harm or death, is ethically wrong. Hence selling of tobacco is also considered as unethical. The second category of duties is the ones, which we are bound to do due to our social or personal relationships. Keeping promises, providing for children when the individual becomes a parent are some of its examples (Singer, 2010). Deontology states that always the right thing needs to be done, even if it harms or does less good to someone. Avoid the wrong even if it benefits or saves someone (Schlegelmilch and Oberseder, 2010). According to the philosopher Kant, it is wrong to lie even if it saves someone from a murderer. According to the deontological point of view, though selling of tobacco by Phillip Morris is considered unethical, the campaign is morally right. So according to deontology, this is considered as moral, since the action is taken for fulfilling its duty enforced by the law, disregarding the consequences of the campaign. Virtue Ethics view on the Phillip Morris Campaign: A virtuous person is the one who not only follows virtues to be a good human being but also believes in the virtues. According to this theory, an action is only considered right when it matches with the action taken by any virtuous person at the same situation (Elms et al. 2010). It is the action taken based on rational thinking rather than on instinct. This theory states that there are certain common virtues, which come naturally to mature human beings though these virtues are not easy to maintain. The good virtues are those, which only benefits human beings (Botan and Hazleton, 2010). Virtues cannot be different for different people. Virtue ethics considers the morality of an individual rather than on the moral act. According to it the intentions of an act is very difficult to evaluate since it requires a deeper understanding of the background situation. The impact on the society or the surroundings should always be considered while taking up an action. So a business is considered ethical when it gives equal importance in evaluating the impact of its products on society as it gives in increasing its productivity. The principles of this ethics emphasizes that humans should reasonably avoid both extreme as well as deficient actions. According to this view, the tobacco companies' low marketing of their cigarette brands is considered as acceptable, considering the fact that even tobacco companies require marketing to sell their products. Loud marketing of tobacco products is not compliant with virtue ethics principles of integrity and trust. The modern list of virtues differs from the earlier lists. Earlier a person was considered as virtuous if that person possessed characteristics like prudence, bravery, temperance, and justice. The modern values include justice, self-care, fidelity, and prudence (Lindgreen and Swaen, 2010). Treating all human beings as equal is known as justice. Fidelity means treating near and dear ones with special care. Caring for our own selves for the betterment of our mental, physical and spiritual health is known as self-care virtues. A prudent person is the one who acquires more of justice, fidelity and self-care virtues. One of the good points of this virtue ethics theory is that ii considers the whole life of a person to call that person virtuous. This theory does not provide guidance on how to handle situations when a person is in a moral dilemma (Pedersen, 2010). However, Phillip Morris campaign seemed to be ethical according to deontology, but researchers have proved that the campaign was not targeted for spreading anti-smoking awareness but rather it was used as a new strategy to endorse their brands and attract new smokers. The campaigns conducted by this company totally ignored the strategies that proved to be effective for preventing smoking among youngsters. So according to Virtue Ethics, this campaign is considered as unethical since the company used it for their own personal gain rather than acting virtuously by preventing adolescents from smoking. conclusion: From the analysis made above it is clear that deontology is ethics based on external rules whereas virtue ethics deals with the moral character of an individual. According to deontology a person should follow and do the moral duties without considering the consequences. This should be compulsorily followed as a rule by each and every individual of the society. That is a person should continue to do his good deeds even if the outcome of the action does not do any good to the society. Whereas virtue ethics states that no one can be bound by a rule book to follow ethics. It focuses on the character of a person and not on the actions. It gives freedom to a person to reasonably identify an action as good or bad. It considers the action that a person with moral values (honesty, integrity, courageous) will take in response to a situation. To conclude on deontology it can be said that how irrelevant it might appear in modern situations, but there are certain beliefs that are worthy of keeping in mind. The exact outcomes of situations are not always predictive. In those cases, a person should always select to do what is best to combat the situation. This is where the importance of the principle of the list of rules is recognized. This set list of rules comes to aid when a person is suffering from indecision. As a result, deontology still gets immense respect in spite of its huge complications. Virtue ethics is the most popular of the ethics theories and are followed vastly in modern days. Virtue based ethics are considered logical and consistent. As it gives the flexibility to understand a situation and act accordingly, it is considered as the most successful theories of ethics. The role of a tobacco company is always considered as unethical. There are different standards for measuring the morality of tobacco companies. By analyzing the Philip Morris anti-smoking campaign for youths using deontology and virtue ethics, it is well established that judging this effort is not as simple and straightforward as it looks. According to deontology this act of Phillip Morris may be considered as ethical because it does its duty by educating the youth. However, when the campaign was looked into deeply, it presented itself as more unethical than ethical. It was clearly established that the campaign was aimed at increasing their growth and promoting their brand. Hence from the Virtue Ethics point of view, the campaigns became unethical. Tobacco, which is the cause of death for 440,000 deaths per year, is the main raw material of business of any tobacco company. Even if the company introduces a healthier form of smoking or conducts an anti smoking campaign, then also it cannot conduct its business without harming anyone. It can be concluded that it is impossible for Phillip Morris or any other tobacco company to pursue its operations ethically. Only total shutdown of operations is the only way by which a tobacco company can be ethical. Finally in order to say about the sustainable management, it can be stated that the control and maintenance of the environment are entirely needed for the environmental protection. The assumption of tobacco is unhealthy for the physical health of the human. In the similar ways, this is also harmful form the sustainability of the external environment. From the ethical point of view, the measurement and control of this incident through the arrangement of the campaign is therefore justified. On the other hand, in order to create awareness among people, the role and contribution of the anti-smoking campaign by Philip Morris is also helpful. References Aguinis, H. and Glavas, A., 2012. What we know and dont know about corporate social responsibility a review and research agenda.Journal of management,38(4), pp.932-968 Arnold, D.G., Audi, R. and Zwolinski, M., 2010. Recent work in ethical theory and its implications for business ethics.Business Ethics Quarterly,20(04), pp.559-581 Botan, C.H. and Hazleton, V. eds., 2010.Public relations theory II. Routledge Brammer, S., Jackson, G. and Matten, D., 2012. Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance.Socio-economic review,10(1), pp.3-28 Brenkert, G.G., 2010. The limits and prospects of business ethics.Business Ethics Quarterly,20(04), pp.703-709 Carroll, A.B. and Shabana, K.M., 2010. The business case for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice.International journal of management reviews,12(1), pp.85-105 Crane, A. and Matten, D., 2016.Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press Elms, H., Brammer, S., Harris, J.D. and Phillips, R.A., 2010. New directions in strategic management and business ethics.Business Ethics Quarterly,20(03), pp.401-425 Gotsis, G.N. and Kortezi, Z., 2010. Ethical considerations in organizational politics: Expanding the perspective.Journal of Business Ethics,93(4), pp.497-517 Gray, K. and Schein, C., 2012. Two minds vs. two philosophies: Mind perception defines morality and dissolves the debate between deontology and utilitarianism.Review of Philosophy and Psychology,3(3), pp.405-423 Griseri, P. and Seppala, N., 2010.Business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Cengage Learning Kitzmueller, M. and Shimshack, J., 2012. Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibility.Journal of Economic Literature,50(1), pp.51-84 Lindgreen, A. and Swaen, V., 2010. Corporate social responsibility.International Journal of Management Reviews,12(1), pp.1-7 Markard, J., Raven, R. and Truffer, B., 2012. Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects.Research Policy,41(6), pp.955-967 Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M. and Jessop, J. eds., 2012.Ethics in qualitative research. Sage Nga, J.K.H. and Shamuganathan, G., 2010. The influence of personality traits and demographic factors on social entrepreneurship start up intentions.Journal of business ethics,95(2), pp.259-282 Pedersen, E.R., 2010. Modelling CSR: How managers understand the responsibilities of business towards society.Journal of Business Ethics,91(2), pp.155-166 Pmi.com (2017) Philip Morris International (PMI) | Homepage. [online] Available at: https://www.pmi.com/ [Accessed on 18 Apr. 2017] Rossouw, D., Van Vuuren, L., Ghani, A.H.A. and Adam, M.Z.A., 2010.Business ethics. Oxford University Press Southern Africa Schlegelmilch, B.B. and Oberseder, M., 2010. Half a century of marketing ethics: Shifting perspectives and emerging trends.Journal of Business Ethics,93(1), pp.1-19. Crane, A. and Matten, D., 2016.Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press Singer, A.E., 2010. Integrating ethics and strategy: A pragmatic approach.Journal of Business Ethics,92(4), pp.479-491 Sparks, J.R. and Pan, Y., 2010. Ethical judgments in business ethics research: Definition, and research agenda.Journal of Business Ethics,91(3), pp.405-418 Trevino, L.K. and Nelson, K.A., 2010.Managing business ethics. John Wiley Sons van Dijk, H., van Engen, M. and Paauwe, J., 2012. Reframing the business case for diversity: A values and virtues perspective.Journal of Business Ethics,111(1), pp.73-84