TSHWANE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

ASSESSMENT 4
BUSINESS ETHICS – BET316D
DUE DATE: 19 June 2024
Exam
TOTAL: 100

Name: Milton Tebatso

Surname : Ndobe
Student No : 221681215

Question 1

1.1 D
1.2 B
1.3 D
1.4 D
1.5 A
1.6 D
1.7 C
1.8 C
1.9 D
1.10 B

Question 2

2.1 True
2.2 True
2.3 False
2.4 False
2.5 False
2.6 False
2.7 False
2.8 True
2.9 False
2.10 True

Question 3

1. D
2. E
3. B
4. F
5. A

Question 4

4.1
4.1.1 Economic Expectation-
The first and most basic responsibility that a company has towards society is to be financially
sustainable. Merely by remaining financially viable, a company can contribute in various
ways to the well-being of society. By being financially sustainable, a company continues to
create value for a wide range of stakeholders. It provides a return on investment for
shareholders, as well as an income for those who are employed by the company.
4.1.2 Mandatory Expectation
The second corporate responsibility is to comply with formal obligations imposed by society.
These obligations serve the purpose of preventing companies from engaging in irresponsible
behaviour that might harm the economy, employees, society or the environment. They are
also intended to protect vulnerable stakeholders, such as minority shareholders, suppliers, and
customers.

4.1.3 Societal Expectation

Besides the mandatory obligations that companies have to fulfil, there are also societal
expectations that companies have to respect. These expectations can take many different
forms. Sometimes they are formalised in voluntary best-practice codes, for example the
United Nations Global Compact, which calls on companies to play their part in protecting
human and worker rights, being environmentally responsible and preventing corruption
(United Nations,2017): However, sometimes these expectations are unwritten norms or
standards that communities expect companies to uphold. Such norms might entail respectful
treatment of stakeholders, or an expectation that the company should not violate societal
norms or a community's health and safety.
There are three main reasons why companies have to respond to these social expectations:
first, to gain legitimacy, second, to enhance their strategic interests, and third, to honour their
ethical duties to society.

4.1.4 Discretionary
The forms of social responsibility that have been discussed so far fall into the category of
responsibilities that companies have to, or ought to, fulfil. There are, however, further
responsibilities that companies may choose to fulfil should they wish to do so (Leisinger,
n.d.). These types of responsibilities are often referred to as the discretionary responsibilities
of companies (Carroll, 1999) and can either take the form of philanthropy or of social
investment.
There are various reasons why companies might choose to make philanthropic donations to
societies. They may do so purely out of sympathy for the plight of less fortunate members of
society, such as the poor or victims of natural disasters. Or they may do so because they
might want to give something back to the society from which they prosper. They might also
engage in philanthropy because their reputation stands to benefit from it, or because it will
give the company more brand exposure.

4.1.5 Corporate Citizenship

Corporations are playing an ever greater role in society. Large corporations in particular have
a considerable impact on the societies in which they operate.
Bigger influence by business inevitably creates bigger expectations from society and, in turn,
greater responsibilities for business. Although, as indicated above, companies are expected to
be responsible members of the societies in which they operate, it is also clear that their
responsibilities are often bigger and broader than those of individual members of society.
This reality is encapsu-. lated in the term 'corporate citizenship, which is becoming the
increasingly preferred epithet to refer to corporate responsibility rather than the term
'corporate social responsibility.
The concept of corporate citizenship is used in either a narrow or in a broad sense. When
used in the narrow sense of the concept, it refers specifically to the political responsibilities of
corporations, while when used in the broad sense of the concept, it refers to all the
responsibilities of corporations in society.

4.2 Immanuel Kant’s publication “Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals”

(1785) delves deeply into the foundations of moral philosophy. In this work, Kant argues for
a deontological approach to ethics, where the morality of an action is judged based on the
action’s adherence to rules or duties, rather than the consequences it produces.

Practical ‘Is’ vs. Moral ‘Ought’

Kant’s assertion that moral ‘ought’ cannot be derived from the practical ‘is’ means that
descriptive statements about what people do cannot inform prescriptive statements about
what people should do. This distinction is crucial in understanding Kant’s rejection of
empirical and consequentialist ethics, which often derive moral norms from observations of
human behaviour and the outcomes of actions. Instead, Kant argues that moral principles
must be determined by reason alone, independent of empirical evidence.

Implications of Kant’s Moral Philosophy

1. Universal Moral Principles: Kant’s framework demands that moral principles

be universally applicable, providing a clear and consistent basis for ethical decision-making.
This universality can lead to rigid adherence to rules, sometimes criticised for not allowing
flexibility in complex situations.
2. Respect for Persons: The emphasis on treating humanity as an end in itself
underscores the importance of human rights and dignity. It forms the philosophical
foundation for many modern human rights theories and practices, promoting respect and
equality.
3. Autonomy and Moral Agency: Kant’s focus on autonomy highlights the
importance of individual moral agency. It insists that moral agents are not just passive
recipients of external moral laws but active participants in creating and upholding these laws
through rational deliberation.
4. Moral Motivation: By prioritising duty over inclination, Kantian ethics
underscores the importance of moral motivation. This view encourages individuals to act out
of respect for the moral law rather than self-interest, fostering a sense of moral integrity.
5. Challenges in Application: While Kant’s theory provides a robust framework
for ethical reasoning, its application can be challenging. The categorical imperative requires
that one consider the universality of their actions, which can be difficult in practice,
especially in situations with conflicting duties or complex circumstances.

In summary, Kant’s “Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals” provides a

rigorous, reason-based approach to ethics that emphasises duty, autonomy, and universal
moral principles.

Question 5

5.1 Affirmative action policies aim to promote diversity and equality in the workplace by
giving preference to historically marginalised groups. However, these policies often face
significant objections. Below, I discuss the common objectives against affirmative action,
substantiated with examples from the provided case study.

Objectives Against Affirmative Action

1. Perceived Unfairness to Majority Groups

One of the primary objections to affirmative action is that it can result in unfair treatment
towards majority groups. Critics argue that affirmative action leads to reverse discrimination,
where qualified candidates from majority groups are overlooked in favor of less qualified
candidates from minority groups.

Example from the Case Study

- The survey indicates that 38.8% of workers believe that the focus on the gender pay gap
negatively affects men. This suggests a perception that men are being unfairly treated or
disadvantaged due to initiatives aimed at promoting gender equality.
2. Hiring Unqualified Candidates
A significant concern is that affirmative action may lead to the hiring of candidates based on
diversity rather than qualifications, potentially compromising the quality of the workforce.

Example from the Case Study

- According to the survey, 54.1% of UK workers think equality policies lead to unqualified
candidates getting jobs. This indicates a widespread belief that the emphasis on diversity
could result in hiring individuals who do not meet the necessary qualifications for the job.

3. Undermining Meritocracy
Affirmative action is often criticised for undermining the principle of meritocracy, where
positions should be awarded based on individual merit, skills, and performance rather than
demographic characteristics.

Example from the Case Study

- The study reveals that hiring managers are more focused on diversity than qualifications,
suggesting that meritocratic principles may be compromised in favor of meeting diversity
targets.

4. Negative Workplace Dynamics

Affirmative action can create tension and resentment among employees who feel that hiring
and promotions are not based on merit. This can lead to a divided workplace and decreased
morale.

Example from the Case Study

- Almost half (48.3%) of professionals believe less focus should be placed on gender
discrimination in the workplace. This sentiment may stem from a perception that current
policies create an uneven playing field, fostering resentment and negatively impacting
workplace dynamics.

5. Tokenism
There is a concern that affirmative action may result in tokenism, where individuals are hired
or promoted to fulfil diversity quotas rather than for their abilities or potential contributions
to the organisation. This can undermine the confidence and legitimacy of those individuals in
their roles.

Example from the Case Study

- The case study mentions that promotion is granted to more women than men, which could
be seen as tokenism if these promotions are perceived to be based solely on gender rather
than merit.

6. Negative Impact on Business Performance

Critics argue that affirmative action can negatively impact business performance if it leads to
the hiring of less qualified candidates. This could result in decreased productivity, innovation,
and overall organisational effectiveness.

Example from the Case Study

- The data suggests that the hype surrounding gender equality issues could actually be having
a negative impact on the workplace, indicating a belief that these initiatives may harm
business performance.

7. Compliance Costs and Bureaucracy

Implementing and maintaining affirmative action policies can be costly and bureaucratic.
Organisations may need to invest significant resources in monitoring compliance, training
staff, and reporting on diversity metrics.

Example from the Case Study

- While not explicitly mentioned, the implication that businesses are focusing heavily on
diversity could suggest increased administrative burden and costs associated with these
initiatives
.
Implications

Affirmative action policies, while well-intentioned and necessary to address historical

inequities, can lead to various objections and challenges. The key is to find a balance between
promoting diversity and ensuring meritocracy and fairness. Organisations need to design
affirmative action policies that are transparent, fair, and based on clear criteria that do not
compromise the qualifications and skills required for job performance. Moreover, fostering
an inclusive culture that values diversity and merit equally can help mitigate some of the
negative perceptions and outcomes associated with these policies.

5.2
Assumptions behind the RIMS strategy
Habermas's moral theory forms the backbone of the RIMS strategy. It however provides only
the broadest of outlines and needs to be fleshed out with a further set of assumptions.
Assumption one: Moral dissensus is a given
The RIMS strategy begins with the assumption that moral dissensus is an inescapable feature
of current culture. Modernity, in its attempt to find secular and rational grounding for
morality, has produced any number of varying moral theories. All of these modern moral
theories are rationally justifiable and defensible. This has resulted in the current condition of
dissensus, where no competing moral theory can succeed in gaining superiority over another.
All need to be taken equally seriously or all need to be rejected. The first option forms the
first assumption of the RIMS strategy.
Assumption two: Moral dissensus does not equal ethical relativism
The RIMS approach assumes that moral dissensus does not necessarily result in ethical
relativism. Moral dissensus only equals ethical relativism if it is assumed that discourse
between the rival moral viewpoints has become meaningless. This is not the case in the RIMS
strategy. The RIMS approach assumes that interaction between rival moral viewpoints is not
only necessary, but is also an important source of creativity that can help to find morally
sensitive answers.
Assumption three: Dialogue can produce solutions
The RIMS strategy assumes that, through dialogue, conflicting moral views can be creatively
harnessed to produce morally sensitive solutions to moral dilem-mas. The preconditions for
such a dialogue are that:
• the reality of moral dissensus is understood and accepted by all participants in the RIMS
decision-making process
• participants commit themselves to finding a solution within this context of moral dissensus.
Once these preconditions have been satisfied, the rivalry between moral viewpoints no longer
frustrates moral decision-making. It becomes instead a creative resource that allows us the
chance to find more inclusive and morally sensitive solutions to the problem than any one
moral viewpoint can achieve on its own.

Assumption four: Focusing on motives is futile

A further assumption is that focusing on the motives underlying moral view. points cannot
solve moral dilemmas in a situation of moral dissensus. If we accept Macintyre's argument,
ethical theories are ultimately based on subjective commitments to certain basic ethical
values. A focus on the subjective ethical commitments underlying the various moral
standpoints cannot solve moral problems. At most, a focus on the underlying motives can
illuminate the various moral viewpoints, but it cannot overcome the rivalry between
conflicting view-points. For this reason, the RIMS strategy advises that motivations
underlying moral views should not dominate the process of ethical decision-making. The
focus should rather be on finding solutions that can accommodate the concerns of all parties
in the dilemma.
Assumption five: Only moral arguments are allowed
Only moral arguments can be included in the dialogue. That is, only arguments that meet the
minimum requirements of a moral argument will be allowed. To qualify, an argument should
display a concern and respect for others and not be merely selfish. It thus excludes any
sociocentric or egocentric arguments. It is only on the basis of ethical considerations that one
can expect to arrive at ethical decisions.

Question 6

6.1
In assessing organisational ethical culture, it’s essential to recognise and classify the current
state of ethical culture within the organisation. The four states that can be used for such
classification are:

• Non-existent: Although an organisation characterised by this type of culture does not

necessarily have a collective pernicious intent, there is no evidence of a collective ethics
mindset or overt alignment to any type of ethical value(s). There is no ethics vocabulary and
thus no ethics talk and no behaviour that is necessarily informed by ethical considerations.
These are typically amoral organisations.
• Underdeveloped: In organisations where the ethical culture is underdeveloped there may be
some pockets (individuals, groups or divisions) of ethical intent. The commitment to ethics is
too low to stimulate sustained ethics mindsets and behaviour though. Ethics talk is tolerated,
but not encouraged. The business case for ethics is seldom acknowledged and selective
morality is practised, for example we will be good to customers if it would create value for
our shareholders.
• Developing: In such cultures ethics is no longer frowned upon. Ethical beliefs, practices and
behaviours are encouraged and ethics talk is allowed.
There may, however, still be a few sceptics that cause some ethical inertia.
The majority of organisational divisions and employees may be ethical, yet certain divisions
may still display some dubious practices and even inadvertently reward unethical behaviour
through rewarding what is achieved rather than to also include how it should be achieved as
criterion.
The ethical culture is thus quite developed, but not yet coherent.
• Well-developed: These types of cultures are unashamedly ethical. Ethical beliefs and
practices enjoy shared meaning among leaders and followers alike. Ethics talk and behaviour
comes to members naturally and ethics is completely integrated in the organisation's identity
and thus in the way of thinking and doing. Ethics is seamlessly integrated into all divisions*
activities. The ethical culture is thus coherent and substantial.

Understanding these four states helps those responsible for ethics management to evaluate
their current position accurately and develop targeted strategies for improvement, ultimately
fostering a robust ethical culture.

6.2
The ethics committee should specify to the ethics office what information they need and the
way in which it should be presented.
The following topics should be covered:
• progress with implementing the ethics management programme
• trend analysis
• critical incidents
• strategic considerations.
Progress with programme implementation
The ethics office will likely agree a work plan with the ethics committee to ensure it
implements the strategy in a structured manner. A key component of the report will therefore
simply be to give feedback on progress made and obstacles encountered.
The ethics work plan will differ from organisation to organisation, but might include
objectives such as conducting an ethics risk assessment, developing or reviewing of the code
of ethics and policies, launching of an awareness campaign, hosting training workshops, and
developing support systems and procedures.
The ethics office should also raise any challenges on which they might need assistance from
the committee or the ethics champion to ensure the strategy is implemented.

Trend analysis
There should be a large amount of information that relates to the ethics pro-gramme that
could give the committee a better indication of the state of ethics in the organisation.

Critical incidents
The ethics committee has both a strategic and an oversight responsibility. This is especially
applicable to social and ethics committees, which are required by the Companies Act (2008),
as their mandate is largely to monitor the impact of companies on stakeholders. As such, the
ethics committee should be kept informed of any material ethical issues or incidents.
These might include matters that could impact negatively on stakeholders, involve regulatory
transgressions, large amounts of money, senior staff members or members of the governing
body, or matters that could pose a repu-tational threat to the organisation. Some matters
brought before the committee may have been raised in the media, but reports should also
include internally identified matters.
Urgent issues might require special meetings to be called. The ethics committee might
resolve ethical dilemmas themselves, or escalate matters to the governing body or other
appropriate committees for resolution.

Strategic considerations
The ethics committee should also be informed of any internal and external developments that
might impact on the ethics strategy or the work of the ethics. office. This could include new
legislation, expansion into high risk markets, political changes, new technologies, etc.
The committee should be informed and allowed to reflect on how these risks and
opportunities might impact on the ethics strategy going forward.