Reconciling values and priorities
Consider the slogan ‘buy Australian’. Is it patriotic for an Australian to buy a car made in Australia (perhaps a Holden) rather than one made by a foreign manufacturer (maybe a Kia)? In a world of global supply chains, it is very difficult to argue that there is any such thing as a car ‘made in Australia’ or any other manufactured good for that matter. But just suppose you could identify goods that create local jobs. Is that good reason to buy them? Why should we be more interested in creating jobs for locals than for workers in say Japan, Korea or Germany?

In a time when the global economy is struggling to climb out of recession perhaps it is understandable your first priority is to local workers, but from a standpoint of need alone, it is hard to argue that helping local workers is better than helping unemployed workers in China – yet it is also hard to argue that we do not have a special obligation to fellow citizens who fall on hard times. This question raises the issue of reconciling sometime competing values and priorities. Just how wide (or narrow) should the circle of concern be for a business?

One way of looking at this problem is to use the idea of ‘stakeholders’ (discussed in detail in chapter 3 of your unit text). The table below lists some types of stakeholder

[pic]

(Brom, de Bakker, Deblonde, and de Graaff, 2006, CMR Manual)

The idea of stakeholders has become closely associated with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The question is though, on what ethical basis does this rest on? It is clear that CSR is founded on businesses voluntarily incurring obligations to stakeholders which places it in the realm on ‘moral individualism’. According to Sandel (2009, p.213) this implies that business should only be subject to obligations that they voluntary incur. What they owe to others, they owe by virtue of consent – a choice or promise or agreement made tacitly or explicitly. Responsibilities are then limited to those businesses take upon themselves and as such businesses are moral agents capable of making choices. Such a view connects closely with libertarianism in that the emphasis is on freedom of choice and utilitarianism in that it implies that business will make those choices based on some calculation of costs and benefits. However, the problem is that businesses are not people, they are organisations (machines if you like). Businesses do not make decisions; people in them do, so it is important to consider individual actions within a business.

From an individual point of view the issue of reconciling competing values and priorities in a business then may be seen in terms of loyalties to various stakeholders (if you want to call them that). To whom (or what) do you owe loyalty to and how far should that loyalty go? These are questions that require a consideration of ethics. The first relates to ‘duty’ (deontology). Sandel (2009, p. 225) argues that there are three types of duty:

1. Natural duties – universal and do not require consent

2. Voluntary obligations – particular, requiring consent

3. Obligations of solidarity – particular and do not require consent

The second relates to virtue ethics (‘the good life’). In this respect when confronted with competing values and priorities it prompts us to figure out how to best make sense of the situation, how it came about and how this relates to the things you care about. This means thinking carefully about the situation and who you are as a manager rather than simply imposing a decision.

If we accept that it is individuals in business who are responsible for the consequences of decisions and that obligations are more than just voluntary, then we need to re-think CSR. Perhaps a better idea is Corporate Moral Responsibility as it makes us re-examine personal responsibility and moral individualism.

Now that you have examined different ethical perspectives and their importance in shaping a business, you now move onto thinking about the ethical positions you may want to take and how to communicate them to others. This is the second part of S-T-A-R – Talking.

-----------------------
Think of examples of each. Identify and explain which is most appropriate to business. Reading the article by Corvino will help you answer these questions.

CSR versus CMR. Explain how they are different and what difference it makes to business?