EWMBA 207B

1
EWMBA 207B

• Lecture 1 March 17
• Theory and Frameworks
• 3 Moral Dilemmas
• Ellen Weinreb

2
Parable of the Sadhu Learning Points

• Our purpose blinds us to the needs of others and
  paradoxically our own needs as well
• Too narrow a focus.. so focused on reaching the
  mountain top that they lost site of what is
  really important
• Lack of leadership, no leader creates a diffusion
  of responsibility, group think, whose burden?
• Disconnect between group ethic and individual
  ethic.
• Cultural bias plays a role in ethics and
  decisions
• Pressures of Conformity. moral commitment from
  Stephen to care for Sadhu based on Quaker
  upbringing

3
Looking for in First Paper

• Critical Thinking. Insight. Ah ha!
• Demonstrate understanding of the theory (more
  than using the right jargon)
• Application of the theory to the analysis
• Application of frameworks from articles (ie A
  Guide to Defining Moments)
• If you choose to apply the theory to your own
  experience, you will not be graded on the
  experience itself

4
Theory
5
Ring of Gyges

• This passage illustrates that most people are
  good because of a desire to maintain an image of
  goodness, not for the sake of goodness itself.
  If one could do wrong and not be detected, than
  most would do so.
• About Temptation
• Senior Managers at Enron wore this ring.
• From Platos Republic - conversation between
  Glaucon and Socrates

6
Aristotle on Virtue

• You character is a function of your behavior.
  Our reasoning should allow us to pursue a
  virtuous amount neither in deficit or excess.
• Imitate virtuousness to be virtuous. What is a
  virtuous person/ horseman/ wife? Functioning
  well is in accordance with the sum of my
  behaviors.
• Slippery slope of habit, you can go down this
  path. Little things wrong lead to other little
  wrong things and leads to unvirtuous character.

7
Mill on Utilitarianism

• Actions are right in proportion as they tend to
  promote happiness.
• Greatest good for the greatest number.
• Sacrificing your own greatest good for the good
  of others is in itself a good.
• One does not weigh ones own interests it is
  benefit v costs for others.

8
Kants Categorical Imperative- First Formulation

• UNIVERSALIZABILITY- An action is morally right
  for a person in a certain situation if, and only
  if, the persons reasons for carrying out the
  action is a reason that he or she would be
  willing to have every person act on, in any
  similar situation. What if everyone did that?
• REVERSIBILITY- The persons reasons for acting
  must be reasons that he or she would be willing
  to have others use, even as a basis of how they
  treat him or her. What if you were in his shoes?
  (linked to the Golden Rule)

9
Kants Categorical Imperative- Second Formulation

• An action is morally right for a person if, and
  only if, in performing the action, the person
  does not use others merely as a means for
  advancing his or her own interests, but also
  respects and develops their capacity to choose
  freely for themselves. (Similar to Rawls)
• i.e. treat human beings as free rational
  decision-makers, equals in their pursuit of their
  interests

10
Ethics of Reciprocity is Universal

• Golden Rule "Do unto others as you would wish
  them do unto you.
• Buddhism  "...a state that is not pleasing or
  delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon
  another?" Samyutta NIkaya v. 353  Hurt not others
  in ways that you yourself would find hurtful."
  Udana-Varga 518
• Christianity  "Therefore all things whatsoever
  ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so
  to them." Matthew 712  "...and don't do what you
  hate...", Gospel of Thomas 6
• Confucianism "Do not do to others what you do
  not want them to do to you" Analects 1523
  "Tse-kung asked, 'Is there one word that can
  serve as a principle of conduct for life?'
  Confucius replied, 'It is the word 'shu' --
  reciprocity. Do not impose on others what you
  yourself do not desire.'" Doctrine of the Mean
  13.3
• Hinduism  "One should not behave towards others
  in a way which is disagreeable to oneself"
  Mencius Vii.A.4  "This is the sum of duty do
  naught unto others which would cause you pain if
  done to you." Mahabharata 51517
• Islam "None of you truly believes until he
  wishes for his brother what he wishes for
  himself." Number 13 of Imam "Al-Nawawi's Forty
  Hadiths."
• Judaism  "...thou shalt love thy neighbor as
  thyself.", Leviticus 1918  "What is hateful to
  you, do not to your fellow man. This is the law
  all the rest is commentary." Talmud, Shabbat 31a
• Shinto  "The heart of the person before you is a
  mirror. See there your own form"
• Sikhism  Compassion-mercy and religion are the
  support of the entire world". Japji Sahib "Don't
  create enmity with anyone as God is within
  everyone." Guru Arjan Devji 259 "No one is my
  enemy, none a stranger and everyone is my
  friend." Guru Arjan Dev AG 1299
• Taoism "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own
  gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss."
  T'ai Shang Kan Ying P'ien. "I am good to the man
  who is good to me, likewise, I am also good to
  the bad man." Tao Te Ching
• Yoruba (Nigeria) "One going to take a pointed
  stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on
  himself to feel how it hurts."

11
Kant differs from Mill

• Kant focuses on motives while Mill focuses on
  results
• In any example where you have a content majority
  and an unhappy minority
• Kant says you put yourself in the minoritys
  shoes and knowing how that feels, support the
  minority.
• Mill would say the opposite and favor the
  majority (greatest good for the greatest
  happiness).

12
Kant differs from Mill (continued)

• In Parable of the Sadhu
• Kant- If I were the Sadhu, I would want to be
  saved
• Mill- Let Sadhu die because he is just one person
• For example,99 non-smoking Ees and 1 unhappy
  smoking Ee work in an office together. A just
  manager wants to act morally right regarding this
  unhappy situation by maximizing happiness (Mill)
  or putting himself in the shoes of the unhappy
  person (Kant). The outside forces of the world
  do not come into play here (ie the fact that
  smoking is bad for your health or California
  prohibits smoking indoors.)
• Kant treat the non-smoker as if you were an
  unhappy non-smoker and make the office a
  non-smoking environment.
• Mill- favor the 99 non-smokers because 99gt1.

13
The Veil of Ignorance - Rawls

• The veil of ignorance is a method used to
  determine whether a certain practice is fair by
  assuming the person choosing this action does so
  without knowledge of potential personal
  consequences. It relies on the persons pure
  sense of right or wrong.

14
Is It Better to be Loved or Feared?- Machiavelli

• A different approach- you have to be effective
• This article delves into two methods of
  leadership instilling love or fear. It
  determines that while both are effective, fear is
  more so because beloved leaders are most apt to
  bear the wrath of his/her subjects during hard
  times.
• Cynical duplicitous, encourage fear
• Do what it takes to be effective

15
Shortcomings of Kant Mill
.and there are many

• Mill
• How do you measure happiness? What is the value
  of the human being happiness? Is one persons
  happiness valued differently than another
  persons happiness? In the Sadhu example, the
  Sadhus death is not weighed heavier than the
  hikers not achieving their goal.
• Kant
• Reversing reversibility leads to a viscous cycle.
  In the smokers example, 99 smokers in a
  non-smoking environment are then unhappy and
  therefore Kant would return the office to a
  smoking environment because he is then putting
  himself in the shoes of the smokers.

16
All the Theory is about Empathy

• All about empathy. Not about egotism or self
  interest
• Plato- temptation
• Aristotle- virtuous is not about self interest
• Mill does not count your own interest
• Kant reversibility
• Veil of Ignorance, Rawls
• But not so for Machiavelli

17
Frameworks
18
A theoretical framework for ethical
decision-making

• What decision would a virtuous person make?
  (Aristotle)
• What will maintain an image of goodness. Is
  temptation a factor? (Plato)
• Which decision is more likely to produce the
  greatest good for the greatest number? (Mill)
• What principles inform each alternative? Would I
  be willing to make this principle a universal
  rule? (Kant)
• If the roles were reversed, would I want the same
  course of action to be followed? (Kant)
• What is the right decision? Have I taken myself
  out of this equation? (Rawls)
• What will be most effective? (Machiavelli)

19
Stakeholder Analysis

• Who is affected (stakeholder analysis)?
• Who do the stakeholders represent?
• What are my obligations to them? What are their
  claims on me (rights)?
• What are the companys obligations to them? What
  are their claims on the business?
• Which stakeholders voice is the loudest?
• Which stakeholder is most important?

20
A Guide to Defining MomentsSource The
Discipline of Building Character p. 55
21
Cases

• Lessons learned

22
Conflict on the Trading Floor Learning Points

• An example of making decisions in the face of
  reality. The protagonist is a junior staff.
• An example where the protagonist fulfills his
  duties as an employee but violates his fiduciary
  duties by participating a deceitful business
  practice.
• The right path is usually not the easy path.
  Because the right path can be so difficult, we
  may not choose to take it.
• Use personal reflection and individual values to
  resolve dilemmas.

23
Will She Fit In? Learning Points

• Leverage
• Build networks to support your case
• Respect and power leverages ones position
• In a lose-lose situation, might be best to save
  the real battles for another day when the topic
  will not be too hot to handle.