This paper has chosen David Rockefeller as one of the business leaders who have in the course of time exhibited exemplary ethical conduct during his years in business. The paper will discuss two ethical traits he has demonstrated as follows;
Focus
It is the findings of this report that David Rockefeller has shown strong focus in the manner in which he has conducted business starting from his entry into small business until his venture into large-scale business endeavors. The level of focus exhibited by Rockefeller has gone a long mile in endearing him to high-profit turnover businesses, with the most dominant being the Federal Reserve Bank of America among others.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Passion
According to the findings of this report, Mr. Rockefeller developed a strong passion for business since his formative years if the number and levels of the businesses he has engaged in are anything to go by. Rockefeller’s passion for business started from his studies of economics at Harvard business school and London School of Economics. Additionally, his passion for business related matters was evident during his stint in the military service where he oversaw the economic intelligence unit in the United States military upon enlisting as an officer.
Exhibition of Ethical Conduct
Rockefeller has exhibited ethical conduct in the period in which he has done business across the globe. The most predominant of them all has been his attitude towards the provision of charity and engagement in charitable activities. It is the findings of this report that David Rockefeller, having made huge profits from his many business endeavors such as from the operations of the Federal Reserve Bank of America, dispensed some of his profits to needy individuals in various forms including but not limited to disaster response, hunger prevention and support of democracy.
Analysis of The Dilemma
The situation faced by the company presents an ethical dilemma that cannot be ignored if the future of the company is anything worth any form of consideration. In this accord, there exist various perspectives through which this kind of scenario can be viewed and analyzed. However, this report purposes to concentrate on consequentialist and deontological viewpoints as the chosen spectrums of analysis. The report wishes to look at it as follows:
Deontological Perspective
In the interest of clarity, the report seeks to provide a reasonable definition of the term to eliminate any chances of misunderstanding that may arise across the management of the company and the staff regarding the dilemma at hand. In the mindset of notable scholars within the disciplines of business, ethics, and philosophy, including other players in the business realm, deontological perspective opines that the fundamental concern of ethics is not the action per se, but the consequences that are realizable or likely to be realized from the measures taken. As such, in a situation where an action is perceived to be wrong, then the action becomes wrong in all the circumstances and conditions related to it. In the present scenario faced by the company, huge sales are likely to be realized from the product. However, it is important to factor into consideration the reality that the consequences likely to result from such massive sales may outshine the effort injected into the action. Information from both the company’s production and quality assessment departments indicate that the product under discussion has the ability to perform the task it was created for.
For purposes of remembrance, the report wishes to note that the production department was authorized to produce an artificial knee joint capable of reducing the time taken by patients to heal from knee related infections, at a comparatively lesser price than that offered by our competitors. Statistics emanating from its application in the areas of concern reveal that while the two objectives of the product have so far been completed, the usage of the product among some patients is likely to result in potentially lethal infection cases. From a deontological perspective, the high sales likely to arise from the sale of the product are highly appreciated and welcome. However, it is paramount and meaningful to accord attention to issues of ethical concerns regarding the activities undertaken in relation to the product. The first and foremost question in this context revolves around the image and reputation of the company, especially from a long term viewpoint. In the opinion of the report, the lethal infections likely to be realized from the sale and eventual usage of the product will most definitely damage the image and reputation of the company. Additionally, the sale and usage of the product and the resultant lethal infections are most likely to result in additional damage to the image of the company besides initiating myriad legal cases which are likely to lead to financial losses or closure of the company in the grand scheme of things. Based on these considerations and the perspective under discussion, it is the opinion of the report that the sale of the product is stopped, further production of the knee joint product to be stalled, and compensation of individuals who have already purchased the product and suffered from the mentioned consequences be initiated.
Consequentialism Perspective
While the report strongly recommends the above approach towards the dilemma facing the company, it would be a futile attempt and unreasonable decision to incline towards a single aspect of the dilemma. Given that the purpose of the company leans towards profit maximization and reduction of expenses, it is reasonable to approach the dilemma at hand from a consequentialist perspective. Similar to the above case, the report will define the term for a similar reason to the one above before proceeding to give reasons towards its suggestion. Consequentialism is an ethical framework based on the assumption that people have the ability to make moral judgments, and that the ethical decision taken produces results whose nature of right or wrong depend on the result of the act. The report will, therefore, provide an additional alternative to the management of the company with regard to the right course of action in relation to the dilemma the company faces. From this second perspective, it is the opinion of the report that the sale of the product should go ahead. There are two reasons for this kind of decision. First, the questions relating to the safety of the product regarding usage and the lethal effects of such usage remain to be mere allegations at the moment, and as such cannot form the basis of stopping its usage. Secondly, if the usage of the product results in the mentioned lethal health ramifications, it is the suggestion of the report that the appropriate departments of the company should resort to a disclaimer regarding the use of the product and the likely consequences of its usage. The latter will prove important in shielding the company from legal problems likely to result in the usage of the product besides fortifying the image and reputation of the company from external threats. A closer dissection of the two approaches indicates that the ethical considerations of the consequentialist perspective seem somewhat weaker compared to the deontological approach. The reason here is that the high sales expected to result from the release of the product into the market will predominantly reduce the time taken to heal knee-related joint wounds on a large-scale compared to the cases of the alleged infections should they arise. Ultimately, this will create an avenue for relief for patients suffering from knee joint-related health problems.
Level of Cognitive Moral Development Represented in The Scenario
The scenario facing the company is best understood through the different levels associated with cognitive moral development, which is apparently present in the case scenario. The report intends to dissect them in the following format: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional through the questions presented by the dilemma as follows:
The question regarding the best course of action for the society in the long term represents the post-conventional level of morality. In this case, the question revolves around the issue of the social contract put in place by the society for the sole purpose of ensuring that the behavior of the individuals inhabiting it fall within need to create a balance between individual rights and social order. At its extreme, this level of post-conventional morality considers universal ethics as a means of guiding individual behavior based on internal principles. In the dilemma facing the company, the employees of the company such as the sales manager and other cadre of staff in the production department have the right to ensure the sustenance of their career through the sale of the knee-joint medical product in addition to earning salaries from such sales. However, despite this kind of reality, they are faced with the challenge of ensuring that their potential buyers do not suffer from the effects related to the usage of the product such as the already mentioned lethal health ramifications. Moreover, being a company engaged in the sale of products falling within the health industry, it is not excluded from the universal ethics governing health and health-related matters. This by extension means that the company has internal moral principles related to such global ethical standards which it must obey.
The second question regarding the information revelation and its consequences on the whistle blower falls under conventional morality. In this case, the originator of the question is perturbed by the repercussions likely to occur to him or her should he or she decide to reveal the information, especially from the perspective of the potential damage caused to personal social approval. In the case of the dilemma facing the company, the sales manager is under confidentiality oath, and as such should conform to the social order related to such disclosure issues. The sales manager is therefore at a crossroad between conforming to the rules set in place by authority, in this case, the overseers of the disclosure agreement notably the law and the company’s legal department, and providing information to the public regarding the harmful effect of using the new product.
The third question regarding the best course of action appropriate in serving justice falls under post-conventional morality. The question takes into consideration the divide existing between individual rights and the balance of the social order. In the case of the dilemma facing the company, there are internal moral principles put in place to serve as courses of action in the interest of justice, besides universal ethics given that the firm falls under health care products provision.
The fourth question resonates with the conventional level of authority due to its reflection on laws related to the problem at hand, in this case, information disclosure. Within the context, the individual asking the question desires to know whether there are laws concerned with the disclosure of the information, in addition to what is likely to happen if such laws are not followed.
The fifth question relates to pre-conventional morality. In this case, the person asking the question is more concerned with the avoidance of punishment likely to result from making a decision that does not auger well with the established rules of obedience. The preservation of self-interest apparently drives the person asking the question in the form of rewards likely to accrue from failing to disclose the information under consideration.
