Assignment 3 Ethical Motives

Assignment 3 Ethical Motives

Introduction

More often than not, employees are faced with ethical dilemmas at the workplace. In this case, their decisions have far-reaching effects on their relationships at the workplace and also in their personal lives. This essay seeks to employ ethical decision-making at the individual level in one’s choices at the workplace. Applying the four stet-process to the ethical decision one takes will establish the employee’s motives for the action taken.

Do you need an original copy of “Assignment 3 Ethical Motives”? We are here to help.

Ethical Dilemma instance at the workplace

Workplace pressures or personal circumstances may give rise to ethicproblemsums for employees. For instance, an employee in the financial department discovers their immediate boss is stealing the company’s resources. The employee raises the issue of the misconduct with the boss, and the boss silences them and even threatens dire consequences if reported. This employee is at crossroads regarding what action to take. They risk losing their job if the art it to the fraud team. But still, the employee can leave whisper it to another employee who raises the issue through the company’s anonymous reporting channel. But reporting the matter, whether themselves or through another party, will motivate this worker to make the right decision wisely (Weiss, 2014, p. 98).

Ethical decisions such as the one facing this employee may involve looking broadly at the individual’s personality, maturity, traits and styles that could affect such a decision (Weiss, 2014). The first tenet of ethical decision-making motive may be a productivist’s one. One views ethical decision-making as motivated by rational self-interest and fulfilling personal interests. This is based on rewards and punishments such as promotions and demotions (Weiss, 2014, p. 96.). By exposing the misdeeds of the immediate senior employee, the worker may be rewarded with a job promotion, and this may motivate him to raise the matter (CleanGovBiz, 2012). Whereas the employee would still have felt the urge to raise tcaseter even in the absence of the reward due to moral conviction of the right course of action, the availability of a reward system could alsbeas a motive for the decision made.

The philanthropist approach to taking the right decision when in an ethical dilemma makes an employee feel that it is their moral duty to do so rather g it for self-interest (Weiss, 2014). In the absence of rewards for raising the issue of financial mismanagement, the junior employee is motivated by the tonal conviction that it is their moral duty towards society and the greater humanity to reveal misgivings that could be judged as immoral.

Commitment to justice and the willingness to risk everything due, combined with moral hope and courage, may be a driver to do what is right. A person may view themselves as the ultimate path towards attaining justice for the rest, and only by exposing the evils committed themselves can justice be achieved. This preceded everything and even put their interests on the line of righteousness (Lincoln, 2012). The employee could be motivated by their conviction that failing to report their boss was involved in financial misconduct, following them to go unpunished for their mistakes. This could make them risk losing their job as threatened by helping bring them to book; otherwise, their conscience woublameach them.

Lastly, there could be a sinister motive for making the right decision in such a case. Let’s say; for instance, there has been bad blood between the employee and their boss. The employee knows that by reporting ting the boss, they will be punished or even sacked and sued by the company. The employee decides to write because it is their moral responsibility to do so but. After all, they want to avenge the treatment previously receivedously by the boss. Such an action is not founded on virtue ethics but personality traits seeking ill reward by doing something right, in the right. It may be argued that such a person does not act in the organization’s exciting or for the sake of ethical conduct but only to achieve the goal of revenge (Weiss, 2014). It is highly likely that if they got along well with their boss, such an action could not have been taken.

Other Related Post: Exemption of Quality Improvement Initiatives

References

CleanGovBiz. (2012). Whistleblower protection: encouraging reporting. Geneva: OECD.

Lincoln, S. H. (2012). Ethical decision making: A process influenced by moral intensity. Annapolis, Maryland: VADM Stockdale Center for Ethical Leadership.

Weiss, W. J. (2014). Business ethics: a stakeholder and issues management approach (sixth ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Assignment 3 Ethical Motives

With this assignment, please direct your attention again to personal-level (not company-wide) ethical choices in the workplace. Motives are vital considerations in ethical decision-making.

On page 96 in Chapter 2 of your course text (see attached file), the author offers a four-step approach to analyzing your ethical motives in a specific situation. In this assignment, apply this four-step process as a tool to determine yowreasonsesUsingng this knowledge is an excellent first step toward building the skills necessary to complete thof process when analyzing youreasonses at work or your organization’s motives in ethical decision-making, designing your social responsibility programs, and formulating organizational policy.

Support your choices with cited concepts from course readings and two reli, able professional sources.

Review the Ethical Motives Scoring Guide to understand the grading criteria for this assignment.

Ethical Motives Scoring Guide

Moral Motives Scoring Guide Grading Rubric
Criteria	Non-performance	Basic	Proficient	Distinguished
Describe the reasoning process behind an ethical decision and provide examples of the reasoning process. 25%	Does not engage the topic of the reasoning process behind an ethical decision.	Offers generalizations about the reasoning behind an ethical decision but does not support these with examples.	Describes the reasoning process behind an ethical decision and provides examples of the reasoning process.	Impartially describes the reasoning process behind an ethical decision and provides examples of the reasoning process.
Describe ethical decision-making principles and actions, supporting the description with concepts from course readings. 25%	Does not engage the topic of ethical decision-making principles and actions.	Offers generalizations about ethical decision-making principles and actions but does not support these with concepts from course readings.	Describes ethical decision-making principles and actions, supporting the description with concepts from course readings.	Describes ethical decision-making principles and actions, supporting the description with concepts from course readings, and identifies own personal assumptions in this understanding of ethics.
Describe cultural and environmental influences on ethidecision-makingking, supporting the description with concepts from a reli, able professional source. 25%	Does not engage the topic of cultural and environmental influences on ethical decision-making.	Offers generalizations about cultural and environmental influences on decision-making-aking but does not support these with evidence.	Describes cultural and environmental influences on decision-making-aking, supporting the description with concepts from a reliable, professional source.	Describes cultural and environmental influences on ethical decision making, supporting the description with concepts from a reliable,e professional source, and identifies owmoralal or cultural assumptions behind this description.
Evaluate a personal decision based on ethical decision-making principles. 25%	Does not engage the topic of personal decisions based on ethical decision-making principles.	It offers the ethical principle on which a personal decision is made but does not evaluate individualisation.	Evaluates a personal decision based on ethical decision-making principles.	Impartially evaluates a personal decision based on ethical decision-making principles.

 

Submission Requirements

Your paper should meet the following requirements:

• Written communication: Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
• APA formatting: References and citations are formatted according to the current APA style ing guidelinPaper lengthier: 500–700 words, or 2–3 typed, double-spaced pages.
• Font and Font Size: Arial, pointing.